The 4530 (Budget) Meeting of the Brisbane City Council

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

The 4530 (Budget) meeting of the Brisbane City Council, held at City Hall, Brisbane on Wednesday 14 June 2017 at 11am

Prepared by: Council and Committee Liaison Office City Administration and Governance

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

THE 4530 (BUDGET) MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL, HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE, Dedicated to a better Brisbane ON WEDNESDAY 14 JUNE 2017 AT 11AM

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Number

SUBMISSION OF BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDING 1 30 JUNE 2018 (INCLUDING THE RESOLUTION OF RATES AND CHARGES 2017-18)

LORD MAYOR’S BUDGET SPEECH 2017-18 62

THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION’S BUDGET RESPONSE 71

REPLY BY THE CHAIRMAN OF FINANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 78 COMMITTEE

PROGRAMS:

Transport for Brisbane 86

Infrastructure for Brisbane 124

Clean, Green and Sustainable City 168

Future Brisbane 209

Lifestyle and Community Services 237

Customer Service 253

Economic Development 255

City Governance 255

BUSINESSES AND COUNCIL PROVIDERS: (Transport for Brisbane, City Projects Office, Civil Construction and Maintenance Operations, Urban Amenity, Waste and Resource Recovery Services, Brisbane City 256 Cemeteries, City Parking, Golf Courses, Riverstage and Asset Portfolio Management)

ADOPTION OF BUDGET 256

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

THE 4530 (BUDGET) MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL, HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE, Dedicated to a better Brisbane ON WEDNESDAY 14 JUNE 2017 AT 11AM

PRESENT:

The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK) – LNP The Chairman of Council, Councillor Angela OWEN (Calamvale Ward) – LNP

LNP Councillors (and Wards) ALP Councillors (and Wards) Krista ADAMS (Holland Park) Peter CUMMING (Wynnum Manly) (The Leader of Adam ALLAN (Northgate) the Opposition) Matthew BOURKE (Jamboree) Jared CASSIDY (Deagon) (Deputy Leader of the Amanda COOPER (Bracken Ridge) Opposition) Vicki HOWARD (Central) (Deputy Chairman of Steve GRIFFITHS (Moorooka) Council) Charles STRUNK (Forest Lake) Steven HUANG (Macgregor) Shayne SUTTON (Morningside) Fiona KING (Marchant) Kim MARX (Runcorn) Queensland Greens Councillor (and Ward) Peter MATIC (Paddington) Jonathan SRI (The Gabba) Ian McKENZIE (Coorparoo) David McLACHLAN (Hamilton) Ryan MURPHY (Doboy) Kate RICHARDS (Pullenvale) Adrian SCHRINNER (Chandler) (Deputy Mayor) Julian SIMMONDS (Walter Taylor) Steven TOOMEY (The Gap) Andrew WINES (Enoggera) Norm WYNDHAM (McDowall)

OPENING OF MEETING:

The Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN, opened the meeting with prayer and acknowledged the traditional custodians, and then proceeded with the business set out in the Agenda.

SUBMISSION OF BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDING 30 JUNE 2018:

FIRST DAY – Wednesday 14 June 2017

RESOLUTION NO. 669/2016-17

RECOMMENDATIONS: PRESENTATION AND SUBMISSION BY THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORD MAYOR FOR THE APPROVAL OF AND ADOPTION BY THE COUNCIL

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 2

RESOLUTION OF RATES AND CHARGES 2017-18:

Pursuant to the provisions of the City of Brisbane Act 2010 (the Act), the City of Brisbane Regulation 2012 (the Regulation), the Standing Rules and the Local Laws of the Council, I present and submit to Council recommendations as to the rates, charges and fees to be fixed for the year ending 30 June 2018 for the approval of and adoption by Council.

1. DEFINITIONS Throughout this resolution, a term appearing in bold italic text is defined in section 14 – DICTIONARY OF TERMS.

2. LAND USE CODES

Until otherwise decided or amended, the land use codes set out in the document Brisbane City Council land use codes 1st July 2017 as tabled shall constitute the land use codes for rating and charging purposes.

3. AVERAGING OF LAND VALUES Pursuant to section 67(4) of the Regulation, Council determines that, for the purpose of making and levying rates and charges for the financial year on rateable land: a) the rateable value of land is to be the averaged value under section 67(4)(b) of the Regulation and

b) the average value will be calculated under section 69 of the Regulation and

c) for the purposes of section 69(2) of the Regulation the ‘3-year averaging number’ for the financial year is 0.93. Note: For properties with land use code 72, the rateable value will be calculated in accordance with section 50(2) of the Land Valuation Act 2010.

4. DIFFERENTIAL GENERAL RATES a) For the purpose of making and levying differential general rates for the financial year on all rateable land in the City, Council determines that – (i) the categories into which the rateable land in the City is to be categorised are –

a) (subject to clause 4(b)), 76 in number and

b) identified by the ‘category’ of the Differential General Rating Table.

(ii) the criteria by which land is to be categorised as being in a particular one of those categories are specified in the ‘general criteria’ and ‘specific criteria’ columns of the Differential General Rating Table opposite the identification of the particular category.

DIFFERENTIAL GENERAL RATING TABLE Category General criteria Specific criteria 1. Residential: Owner Occupied This criterion will only apply where: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) the current use, or having regard to any 1. improvements or activities conducted upon the land, Land to which the following land use codes the potential use of the subject land is solely apply – principal residential purposes. 01 vacant urban land Where the land contains a dwelling house and 06 outbuilding/amenity block or otherwise meets the general criteria above, then this 94 vacant rural land and category will apply: which meets the general criteria for this (i) regardless of the City Plan 2014 zone within category. which that land is situated and 2. 1. only where the land represents the principal Land to which the following land use code place of residence of at least one person who applies – constitutes the owner/s of the land. 02 single unit dwelling (dwelling house) used for principal residential or purposes.

Category General criteria Specific criteria (b) the sole purpose for which the subject land is 3. presently utilised is vacant land and is: The following land is specifically included (i) wholly contained within a zone or combination in this category: of zones defined under Part 6 of City Plan 2014 a. vacant land which meets the general as: criteria for this category or b. premises that would otherwise be the Conservation zone owner’s principal place of residence Environmental management zone but where the owner is incapable of Rural zone occupancy due to ill or frail health and where coexisting with another zone or code is domicile in a care facility, provided contained within this general criteria, Open such premises remain unoccupied by space zone any other person/s. Emerging community zone c. premises subject to a special disability Low density residential zone trust, occupied by a deemed vulnerable Character residential zone pensioner owner. Low-medium density residential zone Medium density residential 4. High density residential zone or a Land to which the following land use code applies – 03 multiple dwelling (ii) Mixed use zone where the predominant use for which land may be utilised is a residential provided that the property complies with purpose or this resolution’s definition of owner occupied multi-residential (single family). (iii) Land contained within the Moreton Island settlements neighbourhood plan defined under Part 7 City Plan 2014 and as shown on the Moreton Island settlements neighbourhood plan map in schedule 2 of City Plan 2014, other than that contained within the resort area of the Tangalooma precinct or (iv) Land that has been purchased by an individual for solely principal residential purposes following the re-configuration of allotments, will be deemed to meet the criteria of this category regardless of any current zone under City Plan 2014 and will continue until such time as the land is reclassified as residential or (c) the property meets this resolution’s definition of owner occupied multi-residential (single family)

2a. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group A This criterion will apply where the land: Subject to meeting the general criteria – 1. (a) Is used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use codes potential predominant use by virtue of its apply – improvements or activities conducted upon the land 01 vacant urban land of non-residential purposes and 06 outbuilding/amenity block (b) Is located outside of the boundaries of the CBD or 72 vacant land – valuation discounted CBD Frame and subdivided land or 94 vacant rural land and (c) Is characterised by one of the land use codes in the a. is not residential purposes land or adjacent specific criteria attributable to this category. b. meets the general criteria of this category. (d) Does not comply with the specific criteria of or categories 2b, 2c ,2d, 2e, 2g, 2h, 2i, 2j or 2k below. 2. Vacant land outside of the CBD or CBD Frame falls Land to which the following land use codes within this category where that land does not meet apply – both the general and specific criteria of category 1 of 10 combined multiple dwelling and shop/s this table. 11 shop (single) 13 shops – shopping group (2 to 6 shops) Vacant land outside of the CBD or CBD Frame falls 15 shop (secondary retail) within this category where that land does not meet both 17 restaurant/fast food outlet the general and specific criteria of category 1 of this table. (non drive-through) 18 special tourist attraction 19 walkway/ramp 20 marina 21 residential institution

Category General criteria Specific criteria 24 sales area 25 office(s) 26 funeral parlour 27 hospital/convalescent home (medical care), (private) 28 warehouse and bulk stores 32 wharves 33 builder's yard/contractor's yard 34 cold store - ice works 35 general industry 36 light industry 38 advertising hoarding 39 harbour industry 41 child care centre 42 hotel/tavern 43 motel 44 nurseries/garden centres 45 theatres and cinemas 46 drive-in theatre 47 licensed clubs 48 sports clubs/facilities 50 other club (non-business) 51 religious 52 cemetery 54 art gallery, museum, zoo (primary code only) 55 library 56 showgrounds/racecourses/airfields 57 parks and gardens/bushland reserves 58 educational 59 access restriction strips 63 boarding kennels/cattery 91 utility installation 92 defence force establishments 95 reservoir, dam, bores 96 public hospital 97 welfare home/premises 99 community protection centre. 2b. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group B This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7.

2c. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group C This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7.

2d. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group D This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7.

Category General criteria Specific criteria 2e. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group E This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7.

2f. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group F This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7.

2g. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group G This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7.

2h. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group H This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7.

2i. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group I This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or its is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7.

2j. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group J This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7.

2k. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group K This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or

Category General criteria Specific criteria and its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.7. (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. 2l. Commercial/Non-Residential – Group L This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use codes potential predominant use by virtue of its apply – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 12 shops – shopping group (> than 6 shops) (b) located outside of the boundaries of the CBD or 22 car park CBD Frame and 29 transport terminal (c) characterised by one of the land use codes in the 30 service station adjacent specific criteria attributable to this category. 31 oil depots (d) does not comply with the specific criteria of 37 noxious/offensive industry categories 2b to 2k above. 40 extractive industry 73 restaurant/fast food outlet (drive- through)

3. Rural This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use codes potential predominant use by virtue of its apply – improvements or activities conducted upon the land 62 wholesale production nursery of non-residential purposes and 64 livestock grazing – breeding (b) characterised by one of the land use codes in the 65 livestock grazing – breeding and adjacent specific criteria attributable to this category. fattening 66 livestock grazing – fattening 67 goats 68 dairy cattle – quota milk 69 dairy cattle – non-quota milk 74 turf farms 75 sugar cane 79 orchards 80 tropical fruits 81 pineapple 82 vineyards 83 small crops and fodder irrigated 84 small crops and fodder non-irrigated 85 pigs 86 horses 87 poultry 88 forestry and logs 89 animals - special. 4. Multi-Residential This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use codes potential predominant use by virtue of its apply – improvements or activities conducted upon the land 03 multiple dwelling of non-residential purposes and 07 guest house/private hotel / hostel (b) characterised by one of the land use codes in the 49 caravan park adjacent specific criteria attributable to this category. 53 re-locatable home park 60 retirement facilities and land used as a multiple dwelling. This criteria includes 'Bed & Breakfast' or 'Home-stay' style accommodation which does not comply with the Performance outcomes and Acceptable outcomes of the ‘Home based business code’ under Part 9 of City Plan 2014.

Category General criteria Specific criteria 5a. Central Business District – Group A This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a property will be included in this differential or 2l above and rating category where – (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a or 2l and As at the date of this resolution it was located within the boundary line shown on is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. the CBD differential rating boundary map at section 15.1. Vacant land within the CBD falls within this category where that land does not meet both the general and specific criteria of category 1 of this table.

5b. Central Business District – Group B This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5c. Central Business District – Group C This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5d. Central Business District – Group D This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5e. Central Business District – Group E This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5f. Central Business District – Group F This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or its (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5g. Central Business District – Group G This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential rating category where –

Category General criteria Specific criteria above and As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a its common name, its property location or and its real property description as shown in the (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. table at section 15.4. 5h. Central Business District – Group H This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5i. Central Business District – Group I This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5j. Central Business District – Group J This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5k. Central Business District – Group K This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5l. Central Business District – Group L This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5m. Central Business District – Group M This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or its (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

Category General criteria Specific criteria 5n. Central Business District – Group N This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5o. Central Business District – Group O This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5p. Central Business District – Group P This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5q. Central Business District – Group Q This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5r. Central Business District – Group R This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5s. Central Business District – Group S This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5t. Central Business District – Group T This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to

Category General criteria Specific criteria and its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. table at section 15.4.

5u. Central Business District – Group U This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5v. Central Business District – Group V This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a As at the date of this resolution it was and recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

5w. Central Business District – Group W This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 5a property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 5a As at the date of this resolution it was and recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.4.

6. Other Applies only where land does not fall within categories: Land not included in categories – 1, 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e, 2f, 2g, 2h, 2i, 2j, 2k, 2l, 3, 4, 5a, 5b, 1, 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e, 2f, 2g, 2h, 2i, 2j, 2k, 2l, 5c, 5d, 5e, 5f, 5g, 5h, 5i, 5j, 5k, 5l, 5m, 5n, 5o, 5p, 5q, 5r, 3, 4, 5a, 5b, 5c, 5d, 5e, 5f, 5g, 5h, 5i, 5j, 5k, 5s, 5t, 5u, 5v, 5w, 7, 8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 8e, 8f, 8g, 8h, 8i, 8j, 5l, 5m, 5n, 5o, 5p, 5q, 5r, 5s, 5t, 5u, 5v, 5w, 8k, 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d, 10, 11a, 11b, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 7, 8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 8e, 8f, 8g, 8h, 8i, 8j, 8k, 9a, 19, 20, 21a, 21b, 21c, 21d, 22a, 22b, 22c, 22d or 22e 9b, 9c, 9d, 10, 11a, 11b, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21a, 21b, 21c, 21d, 22a, 22b, 22c, 22d or 22e

7. Residential: Non-owner Occupied or Mixed Use This criterion will apply where the land is used for mixed Subject to meeting the general criteria – residential purposes or secondary residential purposes, or Land to which the following land use codes has the potential predominant use by virtue of its apply – improvements or activities conducted upon the land for 61 mixed residential these purposes. 70 secondary residential purposes 72 Vacant land ( valuation discounted for subdivided land).

8a. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group A This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

8b. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group B This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where –

Category General criteria Specific criteria As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

8c. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group C This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

8d. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group D This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

8e. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group E This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

8f. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group F This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

8g. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group G This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

8h. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group H This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

Category General criteria Specific criteria 8i. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group I This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

8j. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group J This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

8k. Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group K This criterion will apply where the land is used as a large Subject to meeting the general criteria, a regional shopping centre and is characterised by the property will be included in this differential specific criteria opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.5.

9a. Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group A This criterion will apply where the land is used as a major Subject to meeting the general criteria, a shopping centre and is characterised by the specific criteria property will be included in this differential opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.6.

9b. Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group B This criterion will apply where the land is used as a major Subject to meeting the general criteria, a shopping centre and is characterised by the specific criteria property will be included in this differential opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.6.

9c. Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group C This criterion will apply where the land is used as a major Subject to meeting the general criteria, a shopping centre and is characterised by the specific criteria property will be included in this differential opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.6.

9d. Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group D This criterion will apply where the land is used as a major Subject to meeting the general criteria, a shopping centre and is characterised by the specific criteria property will be included in this differential opposite. rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to either its common name, its property location or its real property description as

Category General criteria Specific criteria shown in the table at section 15.6.

10. CTS – Residential: Owner Occupied * subject to Clause 4(b) This criterion will only apply where: Subject to meeting the general criteria – the current use, or having regard to any improvements or 1. activities conducted upon the land, the potential use of the Land to which the following land use code subject land is solely principal residential purposes. applies – 08 community titles scheme unit(s) used Where the land contains a dwelling unit contained within for principal residential purposes. a community titles scheme and otherwise meets the general criteria above, then this category will apply: 2. The following land is specifically included (a) regardless of the City Plan 2014 zone within which in this category: that land is situated and, a. premises that would otherwise be the (b) only where the land represents the principal place of owner’s principal place of residence residence of at least one person who constitutes the but where the owner is incapable of owner/s of the land. occupancy due to ill or frail health and is domicile in a care facility, provided such premises remain unoccupied by any other person/s. b. premises subject to a special disability trust, occupied by a deemed vulnerable pensioner owner. 11a. CTS – Commercial/Non-Residential – Group A * subject to Clause 4(b) This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 08 community titles scheme unit(s), not used for residential purposes. (b) located outside of the boundaries of the CBD or CBD Frame and (c) characterised by one of the land use codes in the adjacent specific criteria attributable to this category. 11b. CTS – Commercial/Non-Residential – Group B * subject to Clause 4(b) This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2l above and Land to which the following land use code applies – (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2l and 08 community titles scheme unit(s), not used for residential purposes. (c) is primarily characterised by the specific criteria opposite. 12. CTS – Multi-Residential * subject to Clause 4(b) This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use codes potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 08 community titles scheme unit(s), and the property is being used as a (b) characterised by one of the land use codes in the adjacent specific criteria attributable to this category. multiple dwelling.

13. CTS – Central Business District * subject to Clause 4(b) This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land located within the CBD to which the potential predominant use by virtue of its following land use code applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 08 community titles scheme unit(s), not used for principal residential purposes, (b) located within the boundaries of the CBD and mixed residential purposes or (c) characterised by one of the land use codes in the secondary residential purposes. adjacent specific criteria attributable to this category.

Category General criteria Specific criteria 14. CTS – Residential: Non-owner Occupied or Mixed Use * subject to Clause 4(b) This criterion will apply where the land is used for Subject to meeting the general criteria – mixed residential purposes or secondary residential purposes or has the potential predominant use by virtue Land to which the following land use code of its improvements or activities conducted upon the applies – land for these purposes. 08 community titles scheme unit(s).

15. CTS – Minor Lot * subject to Clause 4(b) This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the potential predominant use by virtue of its Land to which the following land use improvements or activities conducted upon the land code applies – of non-residential purposes and 08 community titles scheme unit(s), (b) characterised by one of the land use codes in the and the property is being used for a car adjacent specific criteria attributable to this category. parking space, storage cupboard, storage unit, advertising hoarding or purposes of a like nature.

16. CBD Frame Commercial/Non-Residential This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a property will be included in this differential rating category where – (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 2a or 2l above and As at the date of this resolution it was located completely within the boundary line (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 2a shown on the CBD FRAME differential or 2l and rating boundary map section 15.2.

(c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. Vacant land within the CBD Frame falls within this category where that land does not meet both the general and specific criteria of category 1 of this table.

17. CTS – CBD Frame Commercial/Non-Residential * subject to Clause 4(b) This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a property will be included in this differential rating category where – (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 11a As at the date of this resolution it was or 11b above and located completely within the boundary line shown on the CBD FRAME differential (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category rating boundary map at section 15.2 and to 11a or 11b and which the following land use code applies –

(c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. 08 community titles scheme unit(s), not used for principal residential purposes, mixed residential purposes or secondary residential purposes.

18. Commercial/Non-Residential – Special Concession This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria, a (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 16 property will be included in this differential above and rating category where – As at the date of this resolution it was (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 16 recorded in Council systems by reference to and its common name, its property location or (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.8.

19. CTS – Commercial/Non-Residential – Special Concession * subject to Clause 4(b) This criterion will apply where the land meets: Subject to meeting the general criteria – Land to which the following land use code (a) the general criteria of differential rating category 17 applies – above and 08 community titles scheme unit(s), not (b) the specific criteria of differential rating category 17 used for principal residential

Category General criteria Specific criteria and purposes, mixed residential purposes or secondary residential purposes, and (c) is characterised by the specific criteria opposite. As at the date of this resolution it was recorded in Council systems by reference to its common name, its property location or its real property description as shown in the table at section 15.8.

20. Commercial/Non-Residential – Concessional Subject to meeting the general criteria, a Entry into this category is restricted to those properties that property may be included in this differential have formerly been subject to exemption from rates under rating category where – section 5 schedule 1(f) of this resolution but are By examination of: determined to be no longer exempt. a. the usage of the land and/or b. the visual, spatial and economic attributes of the land and/or c. the existence of any partial use that may comply with current exemption criteria and Council considers inclusion of a property into this category is appropriate. 21a. Drive-In Shopping Centre < 20,000 m2 This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 16 drive-in shopping centres and having a gross land area less than (b) characterised by the land use code in the adjacent 2 specific criteria attributable to this category. 20,000 m . 21b. Drive-In Shopping Centre 20,000 m2 to 25,000 m2 This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 16 drive-in shopping centres and having a gross land area from 20,000 m2 (b) characterised by the land use code in the adjacent 2 specific criteria attributable to this category. to 25,000 m . 21c. Drive-In Shopping Centre 25,001 m2 to 50,000 m2 This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 16 drive-in shopping centres and having a gross land area from 25,001 m2 (b) characterised by the land use code in the adjacent 2 specific criteria attributable to this category. to 50,000 m . 21d. Drive-In Shopping Centre > 50,000 m2 This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 16 drive-in shopping centres and having a gross land area greater than (b) characterised by the land use code in the adjacent 2 specific criteria attributable to this category. 50,000 m . 22a. Retail Warehouse < 7,500 m2 This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria –

Category General criteria Specific criteria (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 23 Retail Warehouse and having a gross land area less than (b) characterised by the land use code in the adjacent 2 specific criteria attributable to this category. 7,500 m . 22b. Retail Warehouse 7,500 m2 to 20,000 m2 This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 23 Retail Warehouse and having a gross land area from 7,500 m2 (b) characterised by the land use code in the adjacent 2 specific criteria attributable to this category. to 20,000 m . 22c. Retail Warehouse 20,001 m2 to 40,000 m2 This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 23 Retail Warehouse and having a gross land area less than (b) characterised by the land use code in the adjacent 2 2 specific criteria attributable to this category. 20,001 m to 40,000 m . 22d. Retail Warehouse 40,001 m2 to 90,000 m2 This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 23 Retail Warehouse and having a gross land area less than (b) characterised by the land use code in the adjacent 2 2 specific criteria attributable to this category. 40,001 m to 90,000 m . 22e. Retail Warehouse > 90,000 m2 This criterion will apply where the land is: Subject to meeting the general criteria – (a) used for non-residential purposes or has the Land to which the following land use code potential predominant use by virtue of its applies – improvements or activities conducted upon the land of non-residential purposes and 23 Retail Warehouse and having a gross land area greater than (b) characterised by the land use code in the adjacent 2 specific criteria attributable to this category. 90,000 m .

b) A property that is contained within one of the above categories (the "Original Category") that has a parity factor assigned to it by this resolution is automatically placed into a separate differential rating category referable to the Original Category and that parity factor. The criteria for this new category are the same as the Original Category with the addition of the parity factor. c) The parity factor applicable to a property is calculated by reference to Table ‘A’. d) Council, using the criteria specified in the Differential General Rating Table identifies the category in which each parcel of rateable land in the City is included. e) For the financial year the differential general rate is first calculated as set out opposite a category determined under (a) and (b) and specified in Table ‘B’ and made equally on the rateable value of all rateable land in the City included in that category. f) The result of (e) shall then be multiplied by the parity factor corresponding to the differential category determined under (a) and (b) and specified in Table ‘B’ to derive the differential general rates levied on an individual property. g) The parity factor referred to in (a) and (b) and specified in Table ‘B’ and which forms part of the calculation of differential general rates shall be determined by reference to the following basis shown in table ‘A’.

TABLE ‘A’

Band factor 1 factor 2

for each dollar of rateable value of the land upon which a pl A 0.00000 0.0000 community titles scheme is constructed up to and including $2,250,000 us

for each dollar of rateable value of the land upon which a community pl B titles scheme is constructed from $2,250,001 up to and including 0.00760 0.0000 $6,000,000 us

for each dollar of rateable value of the land upon which a community pl C titles scheme is constructed from $6,000,001 up to and including 0.00970 0.0000 $10,000,000 us

for each dollar of rateable value of the land upon which a community pl D 0.00225 0.0000 titles scheme is constructed in excess of $10,000,000 us

for each dollar of rateable value apportioned to each lot within a community titles scheme by reference to its interest schedule lot 1.0000 1.0000 entitlement under a community management statement

i. The parity factor referred to in Table ‘B’ is calculated to be the sum of factor 1 divided by the sum of factor 2

ii. Where the parity factor determined above exceeds 5, the parity factor is deemed to be 5.

TABLE ‘B’

Differential Differential Category Description general rate general rate Parity factor (cents in the minimum dollar) 1 Residential: Owner Occupied 0.2801 $685.88 1.0000

2a Commercial/Non-Residential – Group A 0.8896 $1,457.28 1.0000

2b Commercial/Non-Residential – Group B 0.8922 $66,199.12 1.0000

2c Commercial/Non-Residential – Group C 0.8922 $114,411.84 1.0000

2d Commercial/Non-Residential – Group D 0.3268 $1,457.28 1.0000

2e Commercial/Non-Residential – Group E 0.8922 $137,090.68 1.0000

2f Commercial/Non-Residential – Group F 0.8922 $68,150.20 1.0000

2g Commercial/Non-Residential – Group G 0.8922 $134,450.64 1.0000

2h Commercial/Non-Residential – Group H 0.8922 $174,768.04 1.0000

2i Commercial/Non-Residential – Group I 0.7539 $24,116.84 1.0000

2j Commercial/Non-Residential – Group J 0.8922 $99,239.12 1.0000

2k Commercial/Non-Residential – Group K 0.8922 $7,971.80 1.0000

2l Commercial/Non-Residential – Group L 0.8997 $1,457.28 1.0000

3 Rural 0.3223 $614.28 1.0000

4 Multi-Residential 0.4760 $887.96 1.0000

Differential Differential Category Description general rate general rate Parity factor (cents in the minimum dollar) 5a Central Business District – Group A 1.3165 $1,879.80 1.0000

5b Central Business District – Group B 1.0632 $222,237.00 1.0000

5c Central Business District – Group C 0.9574 $242,440.24 1.0000

5d Central Business District – Group D 1.0765 $303,050.32 1.0000

5e Central Business District – Group E 0.9637 $363,660.40 1.0000

5f Central Business District – Group F 1.0941 $424,270.44 1.0000

5g Central Business District – Group G 1.2206 $484,880.56 1.0000

5h Central Business District – Group H 1.0650 $545,490.56 1.0000

5i Central Business District – Group I 1.5942 $599,921.52 1.0000

5j Central Business District – Group J 1.1617 $727,320.84 1.0000

5k Central Business District – Group K 1.8559 $875,271.84 1.0000

5l Central Business District – Group L 1.9380 $1,167,476.00 1.0000

5m Central Business District – Group M 1.3445 $1,277,180.00 1.0000

5n Central Business District – Group N 1.0268 $282,940.34 1.0000

5o Central Business District – Group O 1.4086 $1,317,438.00 1.0000

5p Central Business District – Group P 1.5800 $1,685,887.52 1.0000

5q Central Business District – Group Q 1.9739 $2,039,490.00 1.0000

5r Central Business District – Group R 1.7897 $2,023,579.64 1.0000

5s Central Business District – Group S 1.9380 $1,091,247.00 1.0000

5t Central Business District – Group T 1.8551 $741,689.32 1.0000

5u Central Business District – Group U 0.9568 $258,937.68 1.0000

5v Central Business District – Group V 1.0787 $503,549.40 1.0000

5w Central Business District – Group W 1.2451 $105,000.00 1.0000

6 Other 0.8896 $1,457.28 1.0000

7 Residential: Non-owner Occupied or Mixed Use 0.3663 $894.24 1.0000

8a Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group A 1.1618 $188,591.68 1.0000

8b Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group B 1.1618 $178,776.08 1.0000

8c Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group C 1.4265 $175,337.60 1.0000

8d Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group D 1.1699 $199,558.56 1.0000

8e Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group E 1.1423 $224,392.44 1.0000

8f Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group F 1.1643 $338,927.40 1.0000

8g Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group G 1.5745 $424,374.72 1.0000

Differential Differential Category Description general rate general rate Parity factor (cents in the minimum dollar)

8h Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group H 1.2000 $370,902.80 1.0000

8i Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group I 1.1213 $472,076.60 1.0000

8j Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group J 1.3484 $503,548.40 1.0000

8k Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group K 1.2000 $642,851.44 1.0000

9a Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group A 1.4572 $1,111,112.96 1.0000

9b Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group B 1.2572 $1,236,246.76 1.0000

9c Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group C 1.4709 $1,537,289.04 1.0000

9d Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group D 1.3500 $1,545,225.88 1.0000

10 CTS – Residential: Owner Occupied 0.2791 $685.88 Refer TABLE ‘A’

11a CTS - Commercial/Non-Residential – Group A 0.9450 $1,457.28 Refer TABLE ‘A’

11b CTS - Commercial/Non-Residential – Group B 0.9449 $1,457.28 Refer TABLE ‘A’

12 CTS - Multi-Residential 0.5885 $887.96 Refer TABLE ‘A’

13 CTS - Central Business District 1.1745 $1,879.80 Refer TABLE ‘A’

14 CTS – Residential: Non-owner Occupied or Mixed 0.3305 $894.24 Refer TABLE ‘A’ Use

15 CTS – Minor Lot 0.9538 $716.76 Refer TABLE ‘A’

16 CBD Frame Commercial/Non-Residential 0.8834 $1,593.60 1.0000

17 CTS – CBD Frame Commercial/Non-Residential 0.9328 $1,593.60 Refer TABLE ‘A’

18 Commercial/Non-Residential – Special Concession 0.3752 $1,562.96 1.0000

19 CTS - Commercial/Non-Residential – Special 0.0871 $1,562.96 Refer TABLE ‘A’ Concession

20 Commercial/Non-Residential – Concessional 0.1330 $1,457.28 1.0000

21a Drive-In Shopping Centre < 20,000 m2 0.8937 $9,098.76 1.0000

21b Drive-In Shopping Centre 20,000 m2 to 25,000 m2 0.9519 $26,852.00 1.0000

21c Drive-In Shopping Centre 25,001 m2 to 50,000 m2 0.9345 $43,941.88 1.0000

21d Drive-In Shopping Centre > 50,000 m2 0.9289 $127,866.72 1.0000

22a Retail Warehouse < 7,500 m2 0.8645 $2,367.12 1.0000

22b Retail Warehouse 7,500 m2 to 20,000 m2 0.9059 $17,979.52 1.0000

22c Retail Warehouse 20,001 m2 to 40,000 m2 0.9321 $31,227.56 1.0000

22d Retail Warehouse 40,001 m2 to 90,000 m2 0.9096 $93,840.40 1.0000

22e Retail Warehouse > 90,000 m2 0.9465 $31,227.56 1.0000

(h) Despite (e) and (f), the minimum differential general rate payable in respect of all rateable land in each category determined under (a) and (b) is that shown against its corresponding category in table ‘B’ above with the exception of any land to which Land use code 72 applies or which is otherwise exempt from minimum general rating under section 70(3) of the Regulation.

(i) Limitation of general rate increases

A. In the case of property included in categories 1 or 10 determined under the Differential General Rating Table (a):

(i) Despite (e) and (f) the amount to be levied by way of differential general rates for the financial year in respect of any property to which this subparagraph applies is not to be more than the amount of the differential rates (net of any partial rates remission granted under the Community Title Scheme Remission Policy) levied in respect of that property for the previous financial year increased by 7.50 per centum.

(ii) Subject to (iii) and (iv), subparagraph (i) applies to any land that at the commencement of the financial year is in category 1 or 10 determined under (a), and which is the principal place of residence of the person/s who are the owner of the land, or if more than one person is the owner of the land, at least one of those persons.

(iii) To avoid any doubt, subparagraph (i) does not apply to any land held either wholly or partially in the name of a trust (with the exception of a special disability trust), corporation, organisation, association or any other incorporated body other than an individual or individuals.

(iv) If ownership of any land is transferred on or after the commencement of the financial year, subparagraph (i) will cease to apply on and from the date such transfer takes effect except in the following instances:

(a) change of name on title as a result of marriage or change of name by deed poll or

(b) transfer to, or inclusion of a spouse/de-facto/partner as a result of an amalgamation or separation of assets, or on the death of a spouse on the principal place of residence or

(c) transmissions to surviving joint tenant or tenants on death of other joint tenant.

(v) In the case of land that becomes the principal place of residence of at least one person who is an owner, after the commencement of the financial year, (i) applies from the first rating quarter of the next financial year following the approved application of the owner.

B. In the case of property included in categories 16 or 17 determined under the Differential General Rating Table (a):

(i) Despite (e) and (f) the amount to be levied by way of differential general rates for the financial year in respect of any property to which this subparagraph applies is not to be more than the amount of the differential rates (net of any partial rates remission granted under the Community Title Scheme Remission Policy) levied in respect of that property for the previous financial year increased by 7.50 per centum.

(ii) Subject to (iii), subparagraph (i) applies to any land that at the commencement of the financial year is in Category 16 or 17 determined under (a).

(iii) If ownership of any land is transferred on or after the commencement of the financial year, subparagraph (i) will cease to apply on and from the date such transfer takes effect.

(iv) In the case of property that is included in category 16 or 17 determined under (a) after the commencement of the financial year, (i) applies from the first rating quarter of the next financial year following the approved application of the owner.

If the amount of differential general rates determined under clause (i) A is lower than the relevant category minimum determined under clause (h), the ratepayer must pay the differential minimum general rate applicable to the category.

In the case of properties included in categories 2b to 2k, 5b to 5w, 8a to 8k, 9a to 9d, 18 and 19, a change in either the common name or the rateable property address of the property will not affect the categorisation for differential general rating purposes.

5. EXEMPTIONS FROM GENERAL RATING

Any property used for public, religious, charitable or educational purposes, and: (a) for which an application has been received from the owner and

(b) which is approved by Council as eligible for exemption and

(c) is identified in schedule 1 of this resolution

is exempt from general rating and separate/special rating and charging.

Where a property is currently exempt from general rating under schedule 1 of this resolution undergoes redevelopment or refurbishment and the activities conducted on such a property are temporarily suspended, exemption may, at the discretion of the Chief Financial Officer, continue to be granted provided that:

(a) there is an uninterrupted cycle from cessation of operations, to construction and finally recommencement, of a duration not exceeding 18 months and

(b) the predominant use of the property after redevelopment remains unaltered, or if it does change, it complies with the criterion of another category of exemption and

(c) the ownership of the property does not change during the course of the redevelopment.

Where completion has not been achieved within the above time frame but there is evidence of a continuing process of redevelopment, the Chief Financial Officer may allow an extension for a period not exceeding a further 6 months.

SCHEDULE 1 Exemption criteria (a) Public purposes –

Any property that is vested in, or for the time being placed under the management or control of any person under or in pursuance of any statute, for the purpose of, and being presently utilised as, a showground or an area presently utilised as public recreation or athletic sports or games as evidenced by the provision and existence of facilities for such purpose if that is, in the opinion of the Chief Financial Officer open to the public at all reasonable hours, free of charge. For the purpose of this paragraph, any property vested in the ownership of a local authority other than Brisbane City Council, and used for local government purposes shall be deemed to be used for public purposes.

(b) Religious purposes –

Any property that is: (i) owned by a religious institution and

(ii) does not exceed eight hectares in area and

(iii) the predominant use of which is public worship and having a building thereon used entirely for public worship or for public worship and educational purposes whether or not that land has other buildings on it that are utilised in conjunction with the place of worship.

(c) Charitable purposes –

Any property that is owned by a public charity and the predominant use of such land is the giving of a gift of food, drink, clothing, temporary emergency accommodation or money to the destitute and/or the homeless.

(d) Educational purposes –

Any property that is owned by a religious institution and used entirely as a school, (from year 1 to year 12), as evidenced by the presence of completed buildings from which classes are being provided to an enrolled student population, which may be conducted by or on behalf of such religious institution whether or not that property has other buildings on it that are utilised in conjunction with the school.

For the purposes of this subparagraph, a property shall not be taken to be used entirely for a school unless the property has building/s constructed upon it or sporting fields as evidenced by the provision of purpose-built facilities e.g. football fields, running tracks, athletics facilities etc. which are being actively used for the educational purposes of the school. Any such sporting facilities must represent a majority usage of the property if buildings do not exist upon the site.

To be eligible for exemption under this subparagraph, the property must have a predominant use of, and be presently utilised in conducting educational activities. Properties which incorporate a mixture of educational and commercial activity may not be eligible for exemption. In determining eligibility, consideration may be given to the visual, spatial and economic aspects of the property.

(e) Any property exceeding eight hectares in area which –

(i) otherwise meets the criteria of clause (b) of this schedule (apart from the area restriction) and

(ii) there is a Higher Voluntary Conservation Agreement with Council in respect of part of that property and

(iii) the area of that property which is not subject to the Higher Voluntary Conservation Agreement does not exceed eight hectares in area.

(f) Any property that –

(i) prior to 13 May 1992 was non-rateable for the purpose of levying of rates under the City of Brisbane Act 1924 and

(ii) since 13 May 1992 has –

a) been continuously used for the same purpose for which it was used immediately prior to 13 May 1992 and

b) been in the same ownership as it was immediately prior to 13 May 1992 and

(iii) does not meet any of the criteria for exemption set out in clauses (a) to (e) of this schedule and

(iv) is used for public, religious, charitable or educational purposes and

(v) is deemed appropriate by Council of being exempted from rating despite its inability to comply with clauses (a) to (e) of this schedule.

In establishing the predominant use for the purpose of clauses (b), (c) and (d), consideration may be given to the visual, spatial and economic aspects of the property.

The Chief Financial Officer may rule as to whether or not a particular property falls within any of the categories of exemption under this resolution as to exemptions from rating.

6. SPECIAL RATES

It is determined that a special rate shall be made and levied for the financial year on the rateable value of rateable land identified in table ‘C’ below, for or towards meeting the development costs of the benefitted areas.

In the opinion of Council, properties in these benefitted areas have, or will specifically benefit from, or have, or will have, special access to the services, facilities or activities supplied or provided by the benefitted area undertaken [or proposed to be undertaken] by or on behalf of Council.

The overall plans (O.P.) for the supply or provision of services, facilities or activities and the annual implementation plans (A.I.P.) setting out the actions or processes that are to be carried out and referred to below for each benefitted area are tabled and adopted.

TABLE ‘C’

Benefitted area Criteria O.P. A.I.P. Region Residential Non- rate (cents residential in the rate (cents dollar) in the dollar)

Queen Street Mall All rateable land in the Central (Pink) 0.0928 0.4639 regions of the City Intermediate coloured pink, orange and OP-1 AIP-1 0.0336 0.1669 green on the map tabled (Orange) SR-1 Outer (Green) 0.0104 0.0518

Chinatown and All rateable land in the Central (Pink) 0.2172 1.0843 Valley Malls regions of the City Intermediate coloured pink, orange and OP-2 AIP-2 0.0564 0.2808 green on the map tabled (Orange) SR-2 Outer (Green) 0.0144 0.0706

Manly Living All non-residential Village purposes, rateable land, in OP- Development Levy the region of the City AIP-14 All n/a 0.2076 14 coloured pink on the map tabled SR-14

Clayfield Suburban All rateable land in the Centre region of the City OP- AIP-27 All 0.0608 0.3025 Improvement coloured pink on the map 27 Project tabled SR-27

Banyo Suburban All rateable land in the Centre region of the City OP- AIP-28 All 0.0668 0.3328 Improvement coloured pink on the map 28 Project tabled SR-28

Greenslopes All rateable land in the Suburban Centre region of the City OP- AIP-29 All 0.1124 0.5602 Improvement coloured pink on the map 29 Project tabled SR-29

St Lucia Suburban All rateable land in the Centre region of the City OP- AIP-30 All 0.0856 0.4278 Improvement coloured pink on the map 30 Project tabled SR-30

Kenmore Suburban All rateable land in the Centre region of the City OP- AIP-31 All 0.1116 0.5576 Improvement coloured pink on the map 31 Project tabled SR-31

Cannon Hill All rateable land in the Suburban Centre region of the City OP- AIP-32 All 0.0568 0.2837 Improvement coloured pink on the map 32 Project tabled SR-32

Graceville Suburban All rateable land in the Centre region of the City OP- AIP-33 All 0.0728 0.3626 Improvement coloured pink on the map 33 Project tabled SR-33

Alderley Suburban All rateable land in the Centre region of the City OP- AIP-34 All 0.0772 0.3841 Improvement coloured pink on the map 34 Project tabled SR-34

7. SEPARATE RATES 7.1. Environmental Management and Compliance Levy (i) In the opinion of Council, all rateable land in the City has benefited or will benefit from:

(a) the protection and enhancement of the natural environment by activities undertaken by Council including:  monitoring and enforcement of compliance by others with environmental and planning legislation

 managing of environmental programs and initiatives

 remediation of environmental problems e.g. protection of air quality, waterways, sediment control, landfill issues and effluent discharge.

(b) the meeting of Council's obligations under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (ii) A separate rate be made and levied for the financial year on all land in the City for or towards meeting the costs of the activities and facilities. (iii) Council considers that, it is appropriate that the separate rate shown in table ‘D’, be made on the rateable value of all land in accordance with the differential general rating categories (iiii) The result of (iii) shall then be multiplied by the parity factor corresponding to the differential category specified in section 4 and Table 'B' to derive the separate rates levied on an individual property.

TABLE ‘D’

Differential Differential Category Description separate rate separate rate (cents in the minimum dollar) 1 Residential: Owner Occupied 0.0140 $34.28

2a Commercial/Non-Residential – Group A 0.0445 $72.88

2b Commercial/Non-Residential – Group B 0.0446 $3,309.96

2c Commercial/Non-Residential – Group C 0.0446 $5,720.60

2d Commercial/Non-Residential – Group D 0.0163 $72.88

2e Commercial/Non-Residential – Group E 0.0446 $6,854.52

2f Commercial/Non-Residential – Group F 0.0446 $3,407.52

2g Commercial/Non-Residential – Group G 0.0446 $6,722.52

2h Commercial/Non-Residential – Group H 0.0446 $8,738.40

2i Commercial/Non-Residential – Group I 0.0377 $1,205.84

2j Commercial/Non-Residential – Group J 0.0446 $4,961.96

2k Commercial/Non-Residential – Group K 0.0446 $398.60

2l Commercial/Non-Residential – Group L 0.0450 $72.88

3 Rural 0.0161 $30.72

4 Multi-Residential 0.0238 $44.40

5a Central Business District – Group A 0.0658 $94.00

5b Central Business District – Group B 0.0532 $11,111.84

Differential Differential Category Description separate rate separate rate (cents in the minimum dollar)

5c Central Business District – Group C 0.0479 $12,122.00

5d Central Business District – Group D 0.0538 $15,152.52

5e Central Business District – Group E 0.0482 $18,183.04

5f Central Business District – Group F 0.0547 $21,213.52

5g Central Business District – Group G 0.0610 $24,244.04

5h Central Business District – Group H 0.0533 $27,274.52

5i Central Business District – Group I 0.0797 $29,996.08

5j Central Business District – Group J 0.0581 $36,366.04

5k Central Business District – Group K 0.0928 $43,763.60

5l Central Business District – Group L 0.0969 $58,373.80

5m Central Business District – Group M 0.0672 $63,859.00

5n Central Business District – Group N 0.0513 $14,147.00

5o Central Business District – Group O 0.0704 $65,871.92

5p Central Business District – Group P 0.0790 $84,294.36

5q Central Business District – Group Q 0.0987 $101,974.48

5r Central Business District – Group R 0.0895 $101,179.00

5s Central Business District – Group S 0.0969 $54,562.36

5t Central Business District – Group T 0.0928 $37,084.48

5u Central Business District – Group U 0.0478 $12,946.88

5v Central Business District – Group V 0.0539 $25,177.48

5w Central Business District – Group W 0.0623 $5,250.00

6 Other 0.0445 $72.88

7 Residential: Non-owner Occupied or Mixed Use 0.0183 $44.72

8a Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group A 0.0581 $9,429.60

8b Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group B 0.0581 $8,938.80

8c Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group C 0.0713 $8,766.88

8d Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group D 0.0585 $9,977.92

8e Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group E 0.0571 $11,219.64

8f Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group F 0.0582 $16,946.36

8g Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group G 0.0787 $21,218.72

8h Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group H 0.0600 $18,545.16

Differential Differential Category Description separate rate separate rate (cents in the minimum dollar)

8i Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group I 0.0561 $23,603.84

8j Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group J 0.0674 $25,177.44

8k Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group K 0.0600 $32,142.56

9a Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group A 0.0729 $55,555.64

9b Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group B 0.0629 $61,812.32

9c Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group C 0.0735 $76,864.44

9d Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group D 0.0675 $77,261.28

10 CTS - Residential: Owner Occupied 0.0140 $34.28

11a CTS - Commercial/Non-Residential – Group A 0.0473 $72.88

11b CTS - Commercial/Non-Residential – Group B 0.0472 $72.88

12 CTS - Multi-Residential 0.0294 $44.40

13 CTS - Central Business District 0.0587 $94.00

14 CTS - Residential: Non-owner Occupied or Mixed Use 0.0165 $44.72

15 CTS - Minor Lot 0.0477 $35.84

16 CBD Frame Commercial/Non-Residential 0.0442 $79.68

17 CTS - CBD Frame Commercial/Non-Residential 0.0466 $79.68

18 Commercial/Non-Residential – Special Concession 0.0188 $78.16

19 CTS - Commercial/Non-Residential – Special Concession 0.0044 $78.16

20 Commercial/Non-Residential – Concessional 0.0067 $72.88

21a Drive-In Shopping Centre < 20,000 m2 0.0447 $454.92

21b Drive-In Shopping Centre 20,000 m2 to 25,000 m2 0.0476 $1,342.60

21c Drive-In Shopping Centre 25,001 m2 to 50,000 m2 0.0467 $2,197.08

21d Drive-In Shopping Centre > 50,000 m2 0.0464 $6,393.32

22a Retail Warehouse < 7,500 m2 0.0432 $118.36

22b Retail Warehouse 7,500 m2 to 20,000 m2 0.0453 $898.96

22c Retail Warehouse 20,001 m2 to 40,000 m2 0.0466 $1,561.36

22d Retail Warehouse 40,001 m2 to 90,000 m2 0.0455 $4,692.04

22e Retail Warehouse > 90,000 m2 0.0473 $1,561.36

Despite (iii), the minimum differential separate rate payable in respect of all benefited land as determined under (i) is that shown against its corresponding category in table ‘D’ above with the exception of any land to which land use code 72 applies or which is otherwise exempt from minimum general rating under section 70(3) of the Regulation.

7.2. Bushland Preservation Levy – environment function (i) In the opinion of Council all rateable land in the City has benefited or will benefit from –

 the acquisition and protection of natural bushland or other areas in the City and the provision of facilities for public access to those areas and

 the protection of other natural bushland areas in the City whether privately owned or otherwise and

 the preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, management and enhancement of the City’s environment

undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by Council ("activities and facilities"). (ii) A separate rate be made and levied for the financial year on all land in the City for or towards meeting the costs of the activities and facilities.

(iii) Council considers that, it is appropriate that the separate rate shown in table ‘E’, be made on the rateable value of all land in accordance with the differential general rating categories.

(iv) The result of (iii) shall then be multiplied by the parity factor corresponding to the differential category specified in section 4 and Table 'B' to derive the separate rates levied on an individual property. TABLE ‘E’

Differential Differential separate Category Description separate rate (cents rate minimum in the dollar)

1 Residential: Owner Occupied 0.0098 $24.00 2a Commercial/Non-Residential – Group A 0.0311 $51.00 2b Commercial/Non-Residential – Group B 0.0312 $2,316.96 2c Commercial/Non-Residential – Group C 0.0312 $4,004.40 2d Commercial/Non-Residential – Group D 0.0114 $51.00 2e Commercial/Non-Residential – Group E 0.0312 $4,798.16 2f Commercial/Non-Residential – Group F 0.0312 $2,385.24 2g Commercial/Non-Residential – Group G 0.0312 $4,705.76 2h Commercial/Non-Residential – Group H 0.0312 $6,116.88 2i Commercial/Non-Residential – Group I 0.0264 $844.08 2j Commercial/Non-Residential – Group J 0.0312 $3,473.36 2k Commercial/Non-Residential – Group K 0.0312 $279.00 2l Commercial/Non-Residential – Group L 0.0315 $51.00 3 Rural 0.0113 $21.48 4 Multi-Residential 0.0167 $31.08 5a Central Business District – Group A 0.0461 $65.80 5b Central Business District – Group B 0.0372 $7,778.28 5c Central Business District – Group C 0.0335 $8,485.40 5d Central Business District – Group D 0.0377 $10,606.76 5e Central Business District – Group E 0.0337 $12,728.12 5f Central Business District – Group F 0.0383 $14,849.48 5g Central Business District – Group G 0.0427 $16,970.80 5h Central Business District – Group H 0.0373 $19,092.16

5i Central Business District – Group I 0.0558 $20,997.24 5j Central Business District – Group J 0.0407 $25,456.24 5k Central Business District – Group K 0.0650 $30,634.52 5l Central Business District – Group L 0.0678 $40,861.68 5m Central Business District – Group M 0.0471 $44,701.32 5n Central Business District – Group N 0.0359 $9,902.92 5o Central Business District – Group O 0.0493 $46,110.32 5p Central Business District – Group P 0.0553 $59,006.08 5q Central Business District – Group Q 0.0691 $71,382.16 5r Central Business District – Group R 0.0626 $70,825.28 5s Central Business District – Group S 0.0678 $38,193.64 5t Central Business District – Group T 0.0649 $25,959.12 5u Central Business District – Group U 0.0335 $9,062.80 5v Central Business District – Group V 0.0378 $17,624.24 5w Central Business District – Group W 0.0436 $3,675.00 6 Other 0.0311 $51.00 7 Residential: Non-owner Occupied or Mixed Use 0.0128 $31.28 8a Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group A 0.0407 $6,600.72 8b Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group B 0.0407 $6,257.16 8c Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group C 0.0499 $6,136.80 8d Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group D 0.0409 $6,984.56 8e Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group E 0.0400 $7,853.72 8f Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group F 0.0408 $11,862.44 8g Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group G 0.0551 $14,853.12 8h Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group H 0.0420 $12,981.60 8i Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group I 0.0392 $16,522.68 8j Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group J 0.0472 $17,624.20 8k Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group K 0.0420 $22,499.80 9a Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group A 0.0510 $38,888.96 9b Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group B 0.0440 $43,268.64 9c Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group C 0.0515 $53,805.12 9d Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group D 0.0473 $54,082.92 10 CTS – Residential: Owner Occupied 0.0098 $24.00 11a CTS - Commercial/Non-Residential – Group A 0.0331 $51.00 11b CTS - Commercial/Non-Residential – Group B 0.0331 $51.00 12 CTS - Multi-Residential 0.0206 $31.08 13 CTS - Central Business District 0.0411 $65.80 14 CTS – Residential: Non-owner Occupied or Mixed Use 0.0116 $31.28

15 CTS - Minor Lot 0.0334 $25.08 16 CBD Frame Commercial/Non-Residential 0.0309 $55.76 17 CTS - CBD Frame Commercial/Non-Residential 0.0326 $55.76 18 Commercial/Non-Residential – Special Concession 0.0131 $54.72 19 CTS - Commercial/Non-Residential – Special 0.0030 $54.72 Concession 20 Commercial/Non-Residential – Concessional 0.0047 $51.00 21a Drive-In Shopping Centre < 20,000 m2 0.0313 $318.44 21b Drive-In Shopping Centre 20,000 m2 to 25,000 m2 0.0333 $939.84 21c Drive-In Shopping Centre 25,001 m2 to 50,000 m2 0.0327 $1,537.96 21d Drive-In Shopping Centre > 50,000 m2 0.0325 $4,475.32 22a Retail Warehouse < 7,500 m2 0.0303 $82.84 22b Retail Warehouse 7,500 m2 to 20,000 m2 0.0317 $629.28 22c Retail Warehouse 20,001 m2 to 40,000 m2 0.0326 $1,092.96 22d Retail Warehouse 40,001 m2 to 90,000 m2 0.0318 $3,284.40 22e Retail Warehouse > 90,000 m2 0.0331 $1,092.96

Despite (iii), the minimum differential separate rate payable in respect of all benefited land as determined under (i) is that shown against its corresponding category in table ‘E’ above with the exception of any land to which land use code 72 applies or which is otherwise exempt from minimum general rating under section 70(3) of the Regulation.

8. SPECIAL CHARGES

8.1 Rural Fire Services Levy

(i) All rateable land in the part of the City coloured pink on the maps tabled "SC-1.1", "SC-1.2" and "SC-1.3" in the opinion of Council, has or will specifically benefit from, or has, or will have, special access to the service, facility or activity supplied or provided by the Rural Fire Services Levy undertaken [or proposed to be undertaken] by the respective rural fire brigades.

(ii) The overall plans for the supply or provision of service facility or activity by the Rural Fire Services Levy are tabled "OPC-1.1", "OPC-1.2" and "OPC-1.3" and are adopted.

(iii) The annual implementation plans setting out the actions or processes that are to be carried out by the Rural Fire Brigade districts are tabled "AIPC-1.1", "AIPC-1.2", "AIPC-1.3" and are adopted.

(iv) It is determined that a special charge shall be made and levied for the financial year on rateable land identified above for or towards meeting the costs of the development of fire services in rural areas to provide adequate protection.

(v) The special charge on all such rateable land shown on map “SC-1.1” shall be $35.00. (vi) The special charge on all such rateable land shown on map “SC-1.2” shall be $30.00. (vii) The special charge on all such rateable land shown on map “SC-1.3” shall be $20.00.

9. UTILITY CHARGES

9.1 Waste Utility Charges

Under the City of Brisbane Act 2010, Council has the authority to levy utility charges relating to the provision of waste management, including recycling.

Waste Utility Charges are to be levied for the financial year on all improved premises in accordance with the Waste Utility Charge table. A Waste Utility Charge includes the ongoing provision of Council waste management services, facilities and activities. These include, but are not limited to: general waste service provision, collection and disposal, street sweeping, litter collection, cleansing parks and footpaths, and provision of waste management facilities. An Extra Waste Utility Charge may be levied at premises where either (a) more than the standard collection amount is required to be collected during the standard collection period for that ongoing service, or (b) more than one collection service is required during the standard collection period for that ongoing service. The terms standard collection amount and standard collection period are defined in Council’s Waste Management Technical Notes. In addition to the Waste Utility Charge on all improved premises, an Additional Utility Charge may be levied to a premise to include additional services provided by Council that are not included in the Waste Utility Charge. Additional Utility Charges and relevant Service Establishment Fees are outlined in the Waste Utility Charge Table. Currently, Council offers a Green Waste Recycling Service as an Additional Utility Charge, with associated Service Establishment Fee. The Moreton Island Waste Utility Charge is a separate charge levied due to the complexity and difficulty of service provision on Moreton Island. The supply of a particular collection service type such as Mobile Garbage Bins or Bulk Bins for any given premises is at the discretion of Council, based on the particulars of the location and premises in question. Council’s Manager, Waste and Resource Recovery Services will make such determinations where required. Council’s Waste Management Technical Notes provide detail on how such discretion may be exercised.

WASTE UTILITY CHARGE TABLE Service Category Charge per Service Standard Utility Charges

Waste Utility Charge $318.08 Extra Waste Utility Charge $318.08

Moreton Island Waste Utility Charge $403.28

Additional Waste Utility Charges Additional Waste Utility Charge – Green Waste Recycling Service $81.88

Service Establishment Fees

Service Establishment fee for an Additional Utility Charge – Green Waste Recycling Service $30.00 Service Establishment fee for increased recycling capacity with either a: $30.00

 A large capacity 340 litre recycling Mobile Garbage Bin or

 An extra 240 litre recycling Mobile Garbage Bin

Alteration of Waste Utility Charges: i. Where a request for an alteration of the number of Waste Utility Charges represents a permanent change, the charges will be pro-rated for that period from the waste management service charges effective date. Where a request for an alteration is not going to be permanent, there will be a

minimum period of 90 days when an alteration to the number of charges will be effective, even if the physical change is less than that. ii. Where Waste Utility Charges are altered for reasons such as improved premises being erected, destroyed, removed or demolished during the financial year, these charges commence from the waste management service charges effective date. iii. For an improved premises existing at the commencement of the financial year which has not been previously assessed, the estimated number of services shall for all purposes be a number determined by the Manager, and the Waste Utility Charges shall be payable in respect of the whole of the year unless the Manager otherwise determines. iv. For instances where it may be shown that the number of services recorded in respect of any improved premises is erroneous, the correct number shall be substituted and the Waste Utility Charges shall be adjusted accordingly for a period not exceeding 12 months or such time to be determined by the Manager.

Withdrawal of Waste Utility Charges for unoccupied premises Council may temporarily withdraw the charging of the Waste Utility Charges for any unoccupied improved premises provided: (a) the improved premises is completely unoccupied for a period of not less than two consecutive rating quarters, and (b) the owner of the improved premises provides written and signed notification to Council that the premises are or shall be unoccupied not less than thirty days before the commencement of a rating quarter, and (c) where the improved premises is anticipated to remain unoccupied for a subsequent period of not less than two rating quarters, a fresh written and signed notification must be provided not less than thirty days before the expiration of the prior period, and (d) the owner shall notify Council in writing immediately upon the occupation of the improved premises, providing the date on which occupancy recommenced, and (e) Waste Utility Charges will continue to be applied to the quarterly rate accounts until the owner notifies Council that the property is again occupied. Upon this notification a retrospective credit of Waste Utility Charges for the period the improved premises were unoccupied will be raised against the rate account and be offset against charges for the rating quarter following such notification, and (f) calculation of any credit of Waste Utility Charges will only commence from the rating quarter following receipt of the owner’s notification or the commencement date of vacancy, whichever is the later, and (g) Waste Utility Charges will be automatically reinstated at the end of two rating quarters unless written and signed notification has been provided by the owner seeking a continuation of the suspension within the time specified in (b) above. Notifications not received within the thirty days prior to the commencement of a rating quarter may not be processed from the ensuing rating quarter. In these cases, suspension may commence from the subsequent rating quarter (h) despite (e) above and at the discretion of the Manager, charges may be retrospectively credited at the end of each rating quarter, (or such other interval as deemed appropriate) that the premises continue to be unoccupied beyond the initial two consecutive rating quarter period.

10. GENERAL CHARGES

10.1 Fees and charges

That pursuant to the powers of Council conferred by Acts, By-laws and Local Laws the fees, dues and general charges as set forth in the budget documents entitled "Schedule of Fees and Charges 2017-18" and “Register of Cost-Recovery Fees” are determined and adopted as such for the financial year. The fees and charges in this budget document represent the fees and charges set by Council at the date of the Budget Resolution. Council may alter any of the fees and charges in this booklet by resolution at any time prior to the next Budget Resolution.

11. TERMS AND CONDITIONS

11.1 Levying of rates and utility charges

That all differential general rates, separate rates, separate charges, special rates, special charges and utility charges are to be levied upon a rate account issued in relation to a quarter of the financial year. Adjustments in respect of rates and charges appearing on the rate account may be made from the date of effect of any such change.

11.2 Discount on differential general rates

That differential general rates, whether a quarterly instalment or otherwise for the financial year, be reduced by a discount equal to the amount specified below per annum, or in the case where differential general rates are less than the applicable discount amount per annum, the whole of the differential general rates, to any person who pays the entire amount due on the rate account inclusive of all arrears of rates, utility charges, separate charges, separate rates, special charges, special rates and all interest which shall be accrued on such arrears to the date of payment, but with the exception of general charges, within 30 days after the date of issue of the notice to that person to pay such sum.

a. For properties included in categories 1 or 10 determined under 4(a): $60 per annum. b. For all other properties: nil

11.3 Interest on unpaid rates and utility charges

If the full amount of a rate or charge is not paid to Council within 30 days after the date of issue of the notice by which the rate or charge is levied, the unpaid amount bears interest at 11 per centum per annum (compounding daily).

11.4 Goods and Services Tax (GST)

Where GST is applicable, all rates, charges and/or fees that are subject to GST are deemed to be increased by the amount of any such GST.

12. CONCESSIONS

12.1 Partial remission of rates and charges for qualifying pensioner owners

In accordance with Council’s “Partial Remission of Rates and Charges (Pensioners)” policy (the Pensioner Policy), the following percentages and maximum remissions will apply for the 2017/18 financial year. Remissions are granted on a pro-rata basis of entitlement and ownership.

12.1.1 Pensioners receiving the maximum rate of qualifying pension A 40% remission to a maximum of $990.00 per annum of: (a) General rates (post application of rate capping) and

(b) Environment Management and Compliance Levy and

(c) Bushland Preservation Levy and

(d) Waste Utility charges

and For pensioner owners eligible under section 3.2.6 of the Pensioner Policy effective from 1 July 2017:

A 40% remission to a maximum of $300.00 per annum against the sum of items (a) – (d) above.

12.1.2 Pensioners receiving less than the maximum rate of qualifying pension A 20% remission to a maximum of $462.00 per annum of:

(a) General rates (post application of rate capping) and

(b) Environment Management and Compliance Levy and

(c) Bushland Preservation Levy and

(d) Waste Utility charges

and For pensioner owners eligible under section 3.2.6 of the Pensioner Policy effective from 1 July 2017:

A 20% remission to a maximum of $150.00 per annum against the sum of items (a) – (d) above. 12.2 Partial remission of general rates for certain Not-for-Profit Organisations

In accordance with Council’s “Partial Remission of general rates (Not-for-profit Organisations)” policy, eligible not-for-profit organisations may be eligible for a partial remission of general rates (post application of rate capping) of 50%.

13. COMMONWEALTH LANDS

Charges to be made as per agreement from time to time with the Commonwealth Government.

14. DICTIONARY OF TERMS

CBD: property contained within the boundary line shown on the CBD DIFFERENTIAL RATING BOUNDARY MAP at section 15.1.

CBD Frame: property contained wholly within the boundary lines shown on the CBD FRAME DIFFERENTIAL RATING BOUNDARY MAP at section 15.2.

community titles scheme: premises situated on land in respect of which a Community Titles Scheme or Layered Community Titles Scheme has been and remains registered pursuant to the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997.

dwelling house: a building that is used or is adapted to be used for principal residential purposes, mixed residential purposes or secondary residential purposes.

dwelling unit: a room or group of rooms that is used or is adapted to be used for principal residential purposes, mixed residential purposes or secondary residential purposes.

financial year: the financial year commencing on 1 July 2017 and ending on 30 June 2018.

improved premises: premises that comprise, or upon which is constructed a building, buildings or other improvement. It does not include land upon which the sole improvement is an outbuilding or other minor structure not designed or used for human habitation or occupation.

land use code(s): those land use codes approved by Brisbane City Council effective from 1 July 2017.

local government purposes: activities conducted by a local authority for the provision of services, administration, management, development, welfare, benefit or enjoyment to its residents.

Manager: the Divisional Manager, Executive Manager or Manager of the relevant Unit or Sub-unit of Administration of Brisbane City Council which is responsible for the transaction or activity governed by the Budget.

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 34 mixed residential purposes: residential premises from which a resident owner or an occupier conducts a non-residential or commercial activity, and that activity conforms to but does not exceed the conditions set out in column 3 of the table shown at section 15.3. This specifically does not include: a) owners or occupiers who may work from home and are either self-employed or working from home for their employer either permanently or temporarily, unless any such activity: (ii) involves the sale, manufacture or provision of goods or services on site or (iii) is the place of employment of any other person/s other than the owner or occupier or (iiii) involves the reception of customers to view, purchase or consult on any such goods or services on site and the activity does not exceed the conditions set out in column 2 of the table shown at section 15.3. or b) owners or occupiers who are engaged in a hobby or past-time that does involve the sale, manufacture or provision of goods or services and/or the reception of customers to view, purchase or consult on any such goods or services on site, including low-key, kerb-side sales and stalls, provided any such activity does not exceed the conditions set out in column 2 of the table shown at section 15.3.

Any residential premises that exceeds the conditions set out in column 2 but does not exceed the conditions set out in column 3 of the table shown at section 15.3 will be deemed to be mixed residential purposes. multiple dwelling: a property which: (a) contains more than one self-contained dwelling house/unit, either detached, semi-detached or integrated, whether for use by the same family or by unrelated occupants with the exception of:

(i) self-contained accommodation, either detached, semi-detached or integrated, for the care and shelter of an aged or infirm family member of the occupant/s and which has a gross floor area not exceeding the limitation for a secondary dwelling as set out in the City Plan 2014 (Part 9 ‘Dwelling house code’ and/or ‘Dwelling house (small lot) code’ acceptable outcomes AO1.1 and AO1.2) or

(ii) a Hotel, Motel/Motor Inn/Motor Lodge or Residential Aged Care Facility or

(iii) 'Bed & Breakfast' or 'Home-stay' type accommodation which meets the Performance Outcomes and Acceptable Outcomes of the ‘Home based business code’ under Part 9 of City Plan 2014 or (iv) a property that otherwise meets the definition of principal residential purposes, mixed residential purposes, secondary residential purposes or owner-occupied multi-residential (single family). or (b) comprises a single self-contained dwelling house/unit that exceeds the occupancy standards set under Acceptable outcome AO1.1 of the ‘Dwelling house code’ and/or the ‘Dwelling house (small lot) code’ Part 9, of City Plan 2014 as at the date of adoption of this resolution.

In determining whether a property meets this definition, consideration may be given, but not restricted to: (a) the existence of separate or multiple:

 kitchens/food preparation areas (identified by the presence of a stove and/or oven) or

 metered water, electricity or gas supplies or

 waste collection services or

 mail boxes or

 displayed house/unit numbers or

 pedestrian or vehicular entrances

or (b) the existence of dividing walls that prohibit free internal access from one living unit to another or

(c) the number of occupants resident at the property. non-residential purpose(s): all land that does not conform to the definition of principal residential purposes, mixed residential purposes or secondary residential purposes. owner: for purposes of the differential general rating table and associated provisions means: (a) the ‘registered proprietor’ or:

(b) a resident Life Tenant, nominated as such by the terms of a will or Family/Supreme Court Order, and having been specifically given responsibility for payment of all rates and charges or

(c) a resident lessee of an Auction Perpetual Lease, the terms of any such lease must provide for the lessee to be responsible for the payment of rates and charges and the lessee must be granted title to the land in fee simple at the conclusion of the lease or (d) a resident under a special disability trust. owner occupied multi-residential (single family): a property which by its physical attributes would otherwise constitute a multiple dwelling but (a) is held in private ownership and (b) lawfully comprises no more than two single unit dwellings, one of which is the principal place of residence of the owner and the other is occupied by a family member/s of the owner and (c) is not subject to a residential tenancy agreement between the owner and the family member/s occupying any secondary dwelling house/unit. (d) in the case of multiple owners, each dwelling may be occupied by an owner of the property.

For the purpose of this definition a family member is limited to a child, grandchild, parent, grandparent, sibling or spouse of the owner. A property will meet this definition only by written application to and approval by Council that it complies with the criteria above. predominant use: the single use, or in the case of multiple usages the main use, for which in the opinion of Council the property is being used or could potentially be used by virtue of improvements or activities conducted upon the property. Council may form this opinion by examination of the visual, spatial and economic aspects of the use, these terms being defined herein, and/or where appropriate, the assessment criteria contained within the table shown at section 15.3. premises: includes: a) the whole or any part of any building, structure, or land and b) any construction works whether on private land, Crown land, Council land or any public place. principal place of residence: a single dwelling house or dwelling unit that is the place of residence at which at least one person who constitutes the owner/s of the land predominantly resides. In establishing principal place of residence, Council may consider, but not be limited to the owner’s declared address for electoral, taxation, government social security or national health registration purposes, or any other form of evidence deemed acceptable by Council.

Residential premises which have not, in the opinion of Council met these criteria will be deemed a secondary residence.

The following cases specifically do not comply with the definition of a principal place of residence, namely a single dwelling house or dwelling unit that is:

(a) not occupied by at least one person/s who constitute the owner/s, but occupied by any other person/s, whether in return for rent or remuneration or not, including members of the owner’s family or

(b) vacant, whether permanently or temporarily (for more than 120 days of the financial year), including for the purposes of renovation or redevelopment, except in the case where:

(i) premises being renovated remains the registered principal place of residence for the purposes specified above and that the owner/s do not own any other property which they claim to be their principal place of residence and

(ii) a property is vacant for a period longer than 120 contiguous days of the financial year due to the owner/s absence on an extended holiday, provided that the property remains completely vacant for the entire period of their absence.

(c) premises fully or partially held in other than private ownership.

Such instances will be regarded as being secondary residential purposes. principal residential purpose(s): means the purpose of a use of a dwelling house or dwelling unit where that purpose is solely for a principal place of residence not containing any improvements of a non-residential nature nor comprising any non-residential or commercial activity unless such improvements or activity is limited to: (a) self-contained accommodation, either detached, semi-detached or integrated, for the care and shelter of an aged or infirm family member of the occupant/s. The gross floor area of any such self-contained accommodation is not to exceed the limitation for a secondary dwelling as set out in the City Plan 2014 (Part 9 ‘Dwelling house code’ and/or ‘Dwelling house (small lot) code’, Acceptable outcomes AO1.1 and AO1.2) and/or

(b) the owner/s working from home being either self-employed or working for their employer either permanently or temporarily, unless any such activity conforms with and does not exceed the conditions set out in column 2 of the table shown at section 15.3.

(c) engaging in a hobby or past-time that involves the sale, manufacture or provision of goods or services and/or the reception of customers to view, purchase or consult on any such goods or services on site, including low-key, kerb-side sales and stalls, provided any such activity conforms with and does not exceed the conditions set out in column 2 of the table shown at section 15.3.

Land meeting the definition and requirements of owner-occupied multi-residential (single family) shall be deemed to be used for principal residential purpose(s). private ownership: means land, the certificate of title of which is in the name of an individual or more than one individual and excludes land owned or partially owned by companies, trusts, organisations or any other entity other than an individual. This is regardless of whether the land is occupied as a residence by a shareholder or even the sole shareholder of that company, trust, organisation or entity. property: a parcel or parcels of land recorded together within Council’s systems for rating and charging purposes. public worship: for the purposes of this resolution and to avoid misunderstanding, public worship is defined as follows: (i) worship which is conducted within the concept of “open doors” so that members of the public who are not regular congregation members of the particular religious institution may, without impediment or condition, gain access to and participate in such worship alongside the regular congregation members and

(ii) worship to which members of the public are actively invited to attend by means of signage located at each of the public entrances to the land. Such signage must include an unambiguous and open invitation to members of the public to worship as well as a statement as to relevant worship times (referrals to obtain worship times are not acceptable in lieu of advertised times) and such signage to be printed in a style that is clearly legible from outside of the boundaries of the land and

(iii) worship which is not pre-conditioned upon advance notice of any description and which is not pre-conditioned upon the recommendation or approval of another congregation member or by the completion of any precursory instruction or induction. rateable land: has the meaning given by section 95 of the Act. rateable value: pursuant to section 3 of this resolution, the land value upon which general, separate and special rates are based. rating quarter: in relation to a financial year, means a part of the year of a period of three months commencing on 1 July, 1 October, 1 January or 1 April in that year. religious institution: an institution that is: (a) a recognised denomination by the Commonwealth under the terms of section 26 of the Marriage Act 1961, being proclaimed by the Governor-General as a religious body or a religious organisation for the purposes of that Act or

(b) an exempt institution (of a religious nature, or a religious body) under section 545(1) of the Duties Act 2001 or

(c) registered as a charity under the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Act 2012 as the subtype of entity mentioned in column 2 of item 3 of the table in section 25-5(5) of that Act.

This institution would be established in accordance with the Australian Taxation Office’s definition of a ‘religious institution’ as stated in the Taxation Ruling ‘92/17’ or any subsequent ruling or legislation that amends or further articulates this definition for Federal taxation purposes. residential purpose(s): land that is in, or if it were categorised would be in differential rating category 1, 7, 10 or 14 determined under section 4(a) of this resolution. Any residential premises that exceeds the ‘Assessment Criteria’ for both differential rating category 1, 7, 10 and 14 (columns 2 and 3) of the table shown at section 15.3 is deemed to be non-residential purposes. retirement facility: has the same meaning as given to ‘retirement facility’ under schedule 1 of City Plan 2014, and unless owned and operated by a religious institution, is registered as such with the Department of Justice and Attorney General. secondary residence/secondary residential purposes: a single dwelling house or dwelling unit that: (a) is used solely for the purposes of a place of residence of one family and

(b) is not the principal place of residence of at least one person who constitutes the owner and

(c) does not contain any improvements of a non-residential nature or comprising any non-residential or commercial activity unless such improvements or activity is limited to:

(i) self-contained accommodation, either detached, semi-detached or integrated, for the care and shelter of an aged or infirm family member of the occupant/s. The gross floor area of any such self-contained accommodation is not to exceed the limitation for a secondary dwelling as set out in the City Plan 2014 (Part 9 ‘Dwelling house code’ and/or ‘Dwelling house (small lot) code’, Acceptable outcomes AO1.1 and AO1.2), and/or

(ii) the occupier/s working from home being either self-employed or working for their employer either permanently or temporarily, unless any such activity conforms with and does not exceed the conditions set out in column 2 of the table shown at section 15.3.

(iii) engaging in a hobby or past-time that involves the sale, manufacture or provision of goods or services and/or the reception of customers to view, purchase or consult on any such goods or services on site, including low-key, kerb-side sales and stalls, provided any such activity conforms with and does not exceed the conditions set out in column 2 of the table shown at section 15.3.

The definition includes: (a) vacant display homes, providing they are not being utilised as a sales or site office and

(b) those instances deemed to be a secondary residence by the definition of principal place of residence and those instances set out in the second paragraph of the definition of a principal place of residence. special disability trust: means a trust approved by the courts to protect the interests of a deemed vulnerable pensioner owner. These are established by consent with the pensioner’s attorney, guardian, primary carer or even the state Office of the Adult Guardian. These trusts must comply with the Social Security Act, 1991 (Commonwealth) Part 3.18A – financial provision for certain people with disabilities (Special Disability Trust). vacant land: land devoid of buildings or structures with the exception of outbuildings or other minor structures not designed or used for human habitation or occupation. It does not apply to land that is used for car parking or in conjunction with any commercial activity e.g. heavy vehicle or machinery parking, outdoor storage areas, assembly areas or rural activities such as cultivation, grazing or agistment. visual, spatial and economic: attributes defined separately below pertaining to the usage of land and used in determining the level of non-residential activity being conducted on the premises for differential rating categorisation purposes, or the nature of any activity conducted on the premises for general rate exemption determination. These attributes may be considered in conjunction with the assessment criteria described in the table shown at section 15.3. Each attribute is defined as follows: (a) Visual: The visual impact any non-residential activity may have on the amenity and/or character of the neighbouring area. In measuring this characteristic, consideration would be given, but not restricted, to attributes such as signage, provision of car parking, increased traffic volume and the degree to which the premises differs visually from its neighbouring properties because of its non-residential activity.

(b) Spatial: The proportion of the total land or building area which is dedicated to the carrying out of a non-residential activity.

(c) Economic: The actual or potential economic benefit of an activity conducted on the land in terms of the financial gain or saving to the owner or occupant.

For differential rating categorisation purposes, a property is determined to be used for non-residential purposes where, in the opinion of Council, one or more of the preceding attributes indicate a level of non-residential activity which distinguishes the property from a solely residential purpose. For determination of general rate exemption qualification, these attributes may be used to evaluate whether the predominant use for which the applicant property is being utilised conforms to the exemption criteria. waste utility service charges effective date: the date of a change request, order or adjustment of the waste utility charge. waste management service: waste management services, facilities and activities provided by Council. These include, but are not limited to: general waste service provision, collection and disposal, street sweeping, litter collection, cleansing parks and footpaths, and provision of waste management facilities.

Waste Utility Charge

A Utility Charge applicable to all improved premises for the provision of Council waste management services, facilities and activities.

15. APPENDICES

15.1 CBD differential rating boundary map

Central Business District (CBD) Rating Category Area for Differential Rating Purposes 2017-18

15.2 CBD FRAME differential rating boundary map

CBD Frame Rating Category Area for Differential Rating Purposes 2017-18

15.3 Determining residential categorisation for differential rating These criteria are used to determine whether a non-residential activity conducted on or within premises also used for residential purposes is:

a. allowable within the definition of differential rating category 1 (Residential owner Occupied) or

b. of such a scale or nature as to categorise the property as being of a mixed residential nature and therefore to be included in differential rating category 7 (Non-owner Occupied or mixed use) or

c. of such a scale or nature that it is not allowable in either differential rating category 1 or 7. In this case the property shall be deemed to be for non-residential purposes and categorised according to its non- residential activity.

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3

Assessment Criteria Allowable level of non-residential activity Allowable level of non-residential within differential rating category 1 or 10. activity within differential rating category 7 or 14.

1.1.1. An activity must be 1.2.1. The activity is conducted within a 1.3.1. The activity is conducted conducted on or within a dwelling, where the predominant within a residential property. The predominant use is for residential purposes or dwelling; enclosed structure use is for residential such as a shed or a garage, purposes by the operators 1.2.2. The activity is conducted within a or dedicated area on or of the activity. dwelling house or another enclosed within a property, the structure such as a shed or garage, or predominant use is for dedicated area on or within a residential purposes. property containing a dwelling house, where the predominant use is 1.3.2. The activity is carried out by for residential purposes. one or more of the permanent residents of the 1.2.3. The activity is carried out by one or residential dwelling. more of the permanent residents of the dwelling.

2.1.1. An activity must be 2.2.1. The activity involves no more than 1 2.3.1. The activity involves no subordinate in size and non-resident employee on site at any more than 2 non-resident function and is an one time, where the activity is employees on site at any one inconspicuous component conducted within a dwelling house time. of the primary use of the or dwelling as a permanent 2.3.2. The activity does not use residence. 2.2.2. The activity involves no non- more than a total of 100m2 resident employees on site at any of floor area (except if a time, where the activity is conducted commercial guest within a dwelling of a dual- accommodation, child care occupancy or multiple dwelling. facility or dog/cat day care facility). 2.2.3. The activity does not use more than a total of 50m2 or 30% of the total 2.3.3. The activity does not floor area of the dwelling (except if involve display of goods home-based child care, bed and visible from outside the breakfast or dog/cat day care dwelling, with the exception facility). of low-key kerbside sales and stalls. 2.2.4. The activity does not involve display of goods visible from outside the 2.3.4. The activity does not dwelling. involve hiring out materials, goods, appliances or 2.2.5. The activity does not involve hiring vehicles. out materials, goods, appliances or vehicles. 2.3.5. The activity does not involve display of any signs, 2.2.6. The mixed-residential activity does except where within the not involve display of any signs, residential lot and no larger except where required by law, than 0.6m2 in area. located within the residential lot and

no larger than the minimum size identified in a local law, or if no minimum size identified in a local law, no larger than 0.6m2 in area.

3.1.1. Use of motor vehicles 3.2.1. The activity does not involve more 3.3.1. The activity does not than 1 person waiting at or near the involve more than 3 persons (a) Generates vehicular and premises at any time (excluding the or a group of not more than pedestrian traffic of a permanent resident/s and one non- 15 persons for a single volume no greater than resident employee), (except where appointment, waiting at or reasonably expected in the bed and breakfast, farm stay, home- near the premises at any surrounding residential based child care or a dog day-care time (excluding the area facility). permanent resident/s and two non-resident (b) Exclusively uses or is 3.2.2. The activity does not involve more employees). visited by, vehicle types than 1 customer related motor reasonably expected in the vehicle being parked on the site or in 3.3.2. The activity does not surrounding residential the street/s the site has frontage to, at involve more than area. any time (excluding business related 3 business related motor vehicle/s of the permanent resident/s vehicles being parked on the and one non-resident employee's site or in the street/s the site vehicle) and (except where bed and has frontage to, at any time breakfast, farm stay, home-based (excluding a business child care or a dog day-care facility). related vehicle/s of the permanent resident/s and 3.2.3. The activity involves no more than 1 two non-resident visit per day of a delivery vehicle employees’ vehicle/s). with a capacity of up to 2.5 tonnes. 3.3.3. The activity involves no more than 2 visits per day of delivery vehicles with a capacity of less than 2.5 tonnes.

4.1.1. Use of motor vehicles 4.2.1. The activity does not involve use of 4.3.1. The activity does not associated with the or visits by vehicles with a capacity involve use of or visits by activity must not impact of 2.5 tonnes or greater. vehicles with a capacity of adversely on residential 2.5 tonnes or greater. amenity. 4.2.2. The activity does not involve the repair, servicing, cleaning or 4.3.2. The activity does not accessorising of motor vehicles on involve the repair, servicing, site. cleaning or accessorising of motor vehicles on site.

5.1.1. Hours of operation must 5.2.1. Hours of operation of any non- 5.3.1. Hours of operation are be suited to a residential residential activity are limited to limited to 8am to 6pm environment. 8am to 6pm Monday to Saturday Monday to Saturday except (except where such activity is for paid guest restricted to office activities within accommodation business. the dwelling, such as book-keeping or computer work).

5.2.2. Bed and breakfast, farm stay, home- based child care or a dog day-care facility may operate outside these hours

6.1.1. An activity providing bed Not permitted in Category 1 or 10. 6.3.1. An activity providing bed and breakfast or farm stay and breakfast or farm stay provides acceptable levels involves: of privacy and amenity for residents in adjoining or  No more than 6 paying nearby dwellings. guests accommodated at any

Notes – one time

 Bed and breakfast is the ancillary  The total number of use of a dwelling providing residents and paying guests tourist and visitor short-term does not exceed 10 persons accommodation on a commercial at any one time basis. Bed and breakfast facilities are operated and maintained by the resident host and guests are  Serving of meals only to generally provided with paying overnight guests breakfast. A bed and breakfast does not include short-term  Maximum stay of any guest accommodation or a hostel. does not exceed 7 days.

 Farm stay is the use of a working farm to provide short-term accommodation for tourists and visitors to enable them to experience farm living. It is a secondary business to primary production and is ancillary to the primary residential dwelling on the site. Farm stay does not include short-term accommodation or rooming accommodation.

7.1.1. An activity for a home- 7.2.1. If the activity is a home-based child 7.3.1. If the activity is a home- based child care facility care facility, the maximum number based child care facility, the must not impact adversely of children on the premises does not maximum number of on residential amenity. exceed 7 at any time. children on the premises does not exceed 7 at any Notes – time.

 Home-based child care is a home-based care service providing care for a small group of children within a private dwelling. Home-based child care does not include care in the child’s own home or care by relatives. The Education and Care Services Act 2013 has legislative requirements for home-based child care services

8.1.1. An activity for a dog/cat 8.2.1. If the activity is a dog/cat day care 8.3.1. If the activity is a dog/cat day-care facility must not facility, the maximum number of day care facility, the impact adversely on dogs and/or cats on the premises maximum number of dogs residential amenity. does not exceed 4 at any time. and/or cats on the premises does not exceed 4 at any Notes – time.

 Dog/Cat day-care facility is the ancillary use of residential premises for the care, feeding and exercising of pets other than overnight boarding and does not include animal keeping. Brisbane City Council Animals Local Law 2003 and Animals Subordinate Local Law 2003 contain requirements for keeping of animals.

15.4 Criteria for determining categorisation for differential rating categories 5b, 5c, 5d, 5e, 5f, 5g, 5h, 5i, 5j, 5k, 5l, 5m, 5n, 5o, 5p, 5q, 5r, 5s, 5t, 5u, 5v and 5w from 1 July 2017.

Ref. Rateable Real property description Commonly Differential property known as rating category address (if named)

5B1 151a Roma St, L.2 Sp.100562 Par Nth Brisbane 5b. Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000005001403 Central Business District – Group B 5B2 410 Ann St, L.4 Rp.213466 Par Nth Brisbane Cathedral Square Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002204095 Plaza & Carpark

5B3 369 Ann St, L.24 Rp.216272 Par Nth Brisbane Port Centre Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002216008

5B4 300 Elizabeth St, L.31 Rp.173814 Par Nth Brisbane Northern Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187084 Securities House

5B5 31 Tank St, L.3 Sp.172708 Par Nth Brisbane Santos Place Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004293086

5B6 49 Wharf St, L.25 Rp.216272 Par Nth Brisbane Samuel Griffith Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002216016 Place

5B7 240 Margaret St, L.2 Rp.182958 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002192274

5B8 260 Queen St, L.1 Rp.119919 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181624

5B9 26 Charlotte St, L.1/2 Rp.615 & L.1 Rp.616 Par Nth Brisbane Commercial Law Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187498 Chamber

5B10 120 Edward St, L.5 Sp.135597 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000003896732

5B11 201 Charlotte St, L.8 Rp.178809 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187571

5B12 100 Creek St, L.30 Rp.145982 Par Nth Brisbane National Bank Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002202024 House

5B13 50 Ann St, L.3&10 Rp.128822 & L.23 Rp.146830 Par Nth State Law Brisbane City Brisbane Building RIMS Act# 500000002195616

5B14 100 Edward St, L.1 Rp.188052 Par Nth Brisbane 100 Edward Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002200135 Street

5B15 96 Albert St, L.1 Rp.171563 Par Nth Brisbane State Service

Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002196606 House

5B16 290 Adelaide St, L.2 Rp.180959 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000003897573

5B17 550 Queen St, L.21 Sl.12759 & L.17 Sp.188574 Par Nth Brisbane City Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005278175

5B18 136 Wickham L.458 Sl.3561 Par Nth Brisbane Wickham Terrace Tce, Spring Hill RIMS Act# 500000002200382 Car Park

5C1 144a George St, L.11 Cp.866932 & L.303 Cp.866933 & L.304 Treasury Casino 5c. Brisbane City Cp.866934 Par Nth Brisbane Car Park Central Business RIMS Act# 500000002195301 District – Group C

5C2 136 Queen St, L.1 Rp.114640 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181939

5C3 161 Queen St, L.1/2 Rp.45660 & L.2 Rp.49279 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002186821

5C4 52 Queen St, L.26 B.3149 & L.1/2 22 B.3153 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181830 Arcade

5C5 144 Edward St, L.3 Rp.209571 Par Nth Brisbane National Mutual Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002200176 Centre

5C6 97 Elizabeth St, L.1 Rp.613 & L.22/23 Rp.214366 Par Nth Elizabeth Arcade Brisbane City Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000002187308

5C7 60 Edward St, L.50 Rp.200074 Par Nth Brisbane A G L House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002200119

5C8 288 Edward St, L.1 Rp.132189 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane Jetset Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002200366 Centre

5C9 36 Wickham Tce, L.2 Rp.124155 & Rl.06/215327 Par Nth Brisbane Spring Hill RIMS Act# 500000004051070

5C10 63 George St, L.23 Sp.180748 Par Nth Brisbane David Longland Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004454399 Building

5C11 147 Ann St, L.102/103 Sp.253299 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000005205640

5C12 127 Creek St, L.1 Rp.142803 Par Nth Brisbane Hooker House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201208

5C13 205 North Quay, L.14 B.32372 & L.1 Rp.55922 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002218780

5C14 60 Albert St, L.1 Sp.226353 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004775868

5C15 444 Queen St, L.2 Sp.261923 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000005271352

5C16 102 Adelaide St, L.1 Rp.122123 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201570

5C17 160 Ann St, L.12 Rp.128676 Par Nth Brisbane M I M Building Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002203998

5C18 35 Charlotte St, L.3 Sp.102562 Par Nth Brisbane Charlotte Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000003979710 Chamber & 111 George Street

5C19 40 Tank St, L.6 Rp.813314 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002216263

5C20 150 Charlotte St, L.1 Rp.189266 Par Nth Brisbane SEQEB Head Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187555 Office & Substation

5C21 515 Queen St, L.5 Sp.100339 Par Nth Brisbane Marriott Hotel Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201935

5C22 20 Makerston St, L.12/13 B.361 Par Nth Brisbane Forbes House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002216321

270 Queen St, L.1 Rp.127671 Par Nth Brisbane Post Office 5d. 5D1 Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181632 Square Central Business District – Group D 5D2 255 Queen St, L.1 Sp.148916 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004162323

5D3 343 Albert St, L.343 Sp.262727 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000005091206

5D4 21 Queen St, Reserve.785 - L.492 Cp.855445 & L.300 Conrad Treasury Brisbane City Cp.866930 & L.301 Cp 866931 Par Nth Brisbane Casino

RIMS Act# 500000002186938

5D5 76 Queen St, L.4 Rp.45632 & L.3 Rp.45762 Par Nth Brisbane Chifley At Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181855 Lennons

5D6 130 Queen St, Tl.06/206671 - L.11 Cp.892144 & L.1 Brisbane City Rp.125108 Par Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000002181921

5D7 179 Turbot St, L.179 Sp.262727 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000005091198

5D8 307 Queen St, L.34 Rp.146754 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002186169

5D9 300 Queen St, L.32 Rp.178652 & Sl.06/51430 - L.21 Sl.10753 Brisbane City & Tl.06/234812 – L.22 SP.243732 Par Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005014638

5D10 400 George St, L.2 Sp.172708 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004293078

5D11 324 Queen St, L.1/2 Rp.887 Par Nth Brisbane A N Z Centre Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181673

5D12 89 Adelaide St, L.1 Rp.110131 Par Nth Brisbane King George Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002202115 Tower Commonwealth Bank Building

5D13 145 Eagle St, L.1 Rp.905881 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187019

5D14 167 Eagle St, L.2 Rp.905881 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187001

5D15 53 Albert St, L.1 Rp.140881 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002198149

5D16 545 Queen St, L.10 Rp.185905 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002182564

5E1 320 Adelaide St, L.9 Rp.92926 Par Nth Brisbane 5e. Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201752 Central Business

5E2 140 Elizabeth St, L.100 Sp.228870 & Tl.06/233996 - L.6/9 District – Brisbane City Sp.228871 Par Nth Brisbane Group E RIMS Act# 500000004817389

5E3 363 Adelaide St, L.27 Rp.204754 Par Nth Brisbane Boeing House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201976

5E4 221 Adelaide St, L.31 Rp.178577 Par Nth Brisbane Rowes Arcade, Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002202057 Rosies, Shops, Offices

5E5 133 Mary St, L.1 Rp.182958 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002200127

5E6 140 Alice St, L.1 Rp.40587 & L.12 Sp.231766 Par Nth Brisbane City Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005052141

5E7 357 Turbot St, L.6 Rp.221165 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002204103

5E8 119 George St, L.1/4 Rp.43986 & L.2 Rp.640 & L.1 Rp.641 Par Brisbane City Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000003979777

5E9 59 George St, L.1 Rp.159900 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002195806

5E10 239 George St, L.28 Rp.170279 Par Nth Brisbane Criterion Tavern, Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002195632 Offices

5E11 21 Saul St, L.30 Rp.169792 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002216347

5E12 175 Eagle St, L.10 Sp.151098 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004118796

5E13 163 Charlotte St, L.506 B.118215 & L.1/3 Rp.182759 & L.1 Brisbane City Rp.626 Par Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005186519

5E14 443 Queen St, L.1 Sl.805627 Par Nth Brisbane Prudential Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002186078 Building

5F1 249 Turbot St, L.2 Sp.140773 Par Nth Brisbane Sofitel Hotel 5f. Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004553612 Central Business

5F2 16 Ann St, L.1 Rp.123283 Par Nth Brisbane Mercure Hotel & District – Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002203949 Hotel Ibis Group F

5F3 66 Eagle St, L.16 Rp.229111 Par Nth Brisbane Central Plaza Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187092

5F4 2 Roma St, L.1 Rp.172274 Par Nth Brisbane The Sebel and Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002218988 Citigate Hotels

5F5 54 Mary St, L.14 Sl.12186 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002188447

5F6 61 Mary St, L.22 Rp.178621 Par Nth Brisbane Queensland Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002188660 Minerals and Energy Centre

5F7 123 Albert St, L.51 Rp.890812 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002198040

5F8 62 Ann St, L.14/15 Sl.11335 & L.76/77 B.118224 & L.22 Brisbane City Rp.133027 Par Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000002203956

5G1 259 Queen St, L.2 Sp.148916 Par Nth Brisbane 5g. Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004319055 Central Business District – Group G 5G2 73 Eagle St, L.5 Sp.140665 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004423055

5G3 113 Margaret St, L.1&4 Rp.1075 & L.1 Rp.45960 & L.100 Brisbane City Sp.278163 Par RIMS Act# 500000005278142

5H1 240 Queen St, L.5 Rp.200175 Par Nth Brisbane 5h. Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181616 Central Business District – Group H 5H2 110 Queen St, L.1 Rp.886307 & L.2 Rp.886308 & Tl.06/214694 Brisbane City - L.1 SP.128099 Par Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000004621294

5H3 345 Queen St, L.5 Rp.200298 Par Nth Brisbane Central Plaza Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002186151 One

5H4 12 Creek St, L.4 Rp.173778 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187100

5H5 170 Queen St, L.4 Rp.221710 Par Nth Brisbane Broadway On Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181566 The Mall

5H6 480 Queen St, L.1 Sp.257560 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000005291582

5H7 166 Creek St, L.1 Rp.122127 & Tl.06/216281 - L.53 Sp.121394 Brisbane City Par Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000004067910

5I1 131 Mary St, L.900 Sp.245994 Par Nth Brisbane 5i. Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000005217264 Central Business District – Group I 5I2 45 Eagle St, L.50 Rp.817615 & Sl.06/51313 - L.9 Sl.12596 Eagle Street Pier Brisbane City Par Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000003639264

5J1 275 George St, L.20 Sp.198665 Par Nth Brisbane 5j. Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004687709 Central Business District – Group J 5J2 39 Edward St, L.2 Sl.12006 Par Nth Brisbane Stamford Plaza Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201174

5J3 197 Mary St, L.40 Rp.817615 Par Nth Brisbane Waterfront Place Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000003639736

5J4 152 Alice St, L.22/23 36/37 B.118243 & L.1/3 Rp.1068 & L.1 Royal On The Brisbane City Rp.110657 & L.2 RP.111828 Par Nth Brisbane Park RIMS Act# 500000002195046

5K1 192 Ann Street, L.5 SP.115364 Par Nth Brisbane 5k. Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000003799019 Central Business District – Group K

5L1 266 George L.12 SP.192709 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane Square 5l. Street, Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000004637969 Central Business District – Group L 5L2 111 Eagle Street, L.111 SP.259700 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005132323

5M1 2 George Street, L.654 & RESERVE.636 - L.651 SP.241925 PAR 5m. Brisbane NTH BRISBANE RIMS Act# 500000004931925 Central Business District – Group M

5N1 167 Queen St, L.217 B.11826 & L.1 Rp.574 & L.1 Rp.575 & Hoyts Regent 5n. Brisbane City L.2 Rp.49018 & L.1 Rp.65292 Par Nth Brisbane Building Central Business RIMS Act# 500000002186813 District – Group N

5N2 131a Mary St, L.1 Sp.245994 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000005217256

5O1 185 Queen Street, L.1/2 SP.134044 Par Nth Brisbane Wintergarden 5o. Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000003963805 Complex & Central Business Hilton Hotel District – Group O

5P1 226 Queen Street, L.32 SP.156458 & TL.06/234860 - L.33 Queens Plaza 5p. Brisbane SP.182841 & L.1/3 SP.182858 Par Nth Brisbane Central Business RIMS Act# 500000005062777 District – Group P

5Q1 123 Eagle Street, L.122 SP.259700 & L.123 SP.208982 Par Nth 5q. Brisbane Brisbane Central Business RIMS Act# 500000005141670 District – Group Q

5R1 91 Queen Street, L.41 RP.218420 & SL.06/52311 - L.711 5r. Brisbane SL.802985 & SL.06/52309 - L.712 SL.837761 & Central Business SL.06/52310 - L.710 SL.12438 & PO.06/217663 District – - L.42 SP.145288 (L.42 - Volumetric Lot (Closed Group R Road - Strata) Par Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000004130163

5S1 159 Roma Street, L.34 SP.100560 & L.1 SP.207220 Par Nth 5s. Brisbane Brisbane Central Business RIMS Act# 500000005029487 District – Group S

5T1 141 Queen Street, L.1/4 RP.113488 & TL.06/233650 - L.5 5t. Brisbane SP.228408 Par Nth Brisbane Central Business RIMS Act# 500000002186839 District – Group T

5U1 200 Mary Street, L.9 RP.196746 Par Nth Brisbane 5u. Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000002188553 Central Business District – Group U 5U2 313 Adelaide L.5 RP.195923 Par Nth Brisbane Street, Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000002201992

5U3 375 Turbot Street, L.50 SP.134928 Par Nth Brisbane Spring Hill Spring Hill RIMS Act# 500000004041311 Marketplace

5U4 55 Elizabeth L.30/31 SP.254940 Par Nth Brisbane Street, Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005063478

5U5 280 Elizabeth L.1/2 RP.979 & L.26 SL.11452 Par Nth Brisbane Street, Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000002187076

5V1 69 Ann Street, L.21 SP.198665 Par Nth Brisbane 5v. Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000004687717 Central Business District – Group V 5V2 245 Charlotte L.2 RP.157971 Par Nth Brisbane A M P Place Street, Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000002187563

5W1 142 George St, Reserve.631 - L.682 Cp.855445 Par Nth Brisbane Conrad Treasury 5w. Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002195277 Hotel Central Business District – Group W 5W2 126 Margaret St, L.5 Rp.193122 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002192258

5W3 249 Albert St, L.1/2 4 Rp.707 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002197059

5W4 30 Herschel St, L.7 B.361 Par Nth Brisbane Suncorp Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002216271

5W5 180 Queen St, L.1 Rp.676 & L.1/2 Rp.677 & L.2 Rp.45859,Par Brisbane City Nth Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000002181574

5W6 103 Mary St, L.17 Rp.129686 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002188637

5W7 261 Queen St, L.33 Rp.48556 Par Nth Brisbane G.P.O. and Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002186714 Exchange

5W8 120 Queen St, L.13/14 23 B.3153 Par Nth Brisbane Sportsgirl Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181913

5W9 217 George St, L.16 Rp.178645 Par Nth Brisbane Concorde House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181822

5W10 19 George St, L.5 Rp.201074 Par Nth Brisbane Queensland Club Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002196309

5W11 84 Queen St, L.26 Rp.119279 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002181863

5W12 46 Charlotte St, L.1 Rp.188148 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187522

5W13 33 Herschel St, L.7 Rp.105382 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002216313

5W14 342 George St, L.2/4 Rp.778 Par Nth Brisbane George Cinema Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002195350

5W15 241 Adelaide St, L.1 Rp.948 & L.695 Sl.12260 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002202040

5W16 103 George St, L.19 B.118241 Par Nth Brisbane Bellevue Hotel Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002195764

5W17 163 Ann St, L.1&4 Sp.157241 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004273245

5W18 333 Adelaide St, L.12 Rp.125034 Par Nth Brisbane 333 Adelaide Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201984 Street

5W19 166 Wickham L.2/3 Rp.43451 Par Nth Brisbane Tce, Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000002215778 City

5W20 33 Queen St, L.2 Rp.52526 Par Nth Brisbane Bank Of New Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002186920 South Wales Chambers

5W21 41b Gardens Reserve.2856 - L.438 Sl.8601 Par Nth Brisbane Point Rd, RIMS Act# 500000002195095 Brisbane City

5W22 126 Adelaide St, L.6 Rp.40997 Par Nth Brisbane Mayfair Arcade Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201596

5W23 116 Adelaide St, L.5 Rp.40997 Par Nth Brisbane M B F House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201588

5W24 300 Ann St, L.3 Rp.211213 Par Nth Brisbane Oracle House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004874323

5W25 40 Elizabeth St, L.1 Rp.883066 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002187068

5W27 316 Adelaide St, L.13/15 Rp.46148 Par Nth Brisbane Century House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201745

5W28 370 Queen St, L.1 Rp.134970 Par Nth Brisbane M M I Building Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002182267

5W29 85 George St, L.18 Rp.209685 Par Nth Brisbane Capital Hill Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002195772

5W30 38 Wharf St, L.11 B.118227 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002215869

5W31 500 Queen St, L.1/3 Rp.88472 Par Nth Brisbane 500 Queen Street Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002182481

5W32 388 Queen St, L.7 B.118227 Par Nth Brisbane Q I D C House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002182283

5W33 484 Queen St, L.100 Sp.215065 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004676793

5W34 406 Queen St, L.2 Rp.61511 Par Nth Brisbane Credit Union Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002182309 Australia House

5W35 380 Queen St, L.6 B.118227 & L.2 Rp.101086 Par Nth Brisbane Guardian Royal Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002182275 Exchange Building

5W36 237 Elizabeth St, L.1 Sp.191262 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004487241

5W37 264 Margaret St, L.4 Rp.183707 Par Nth Brisbane Elders House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002192282

5W38 124 Albert St, L.11 B.118233 Par Nth Brisbane Pane e Vino Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002196622

5W39 142 Albert St, L.9 B.118233 & L.2 Rp.612 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002196978

5W40 299 Adelaide St, L.4 Rp.857048 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002202016

5W41 243 Edward St, L.18 Rp.79119 Par Nth Brisbane Travel House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002200432

5W42 111 Elizabeth St, L.8 B.118233 Par Nth Brisbane Borders Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002196986 Bookstore

5W43 80 Eagle St, L.1 Sp.192432 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004674384

5W44 95 North Quay, L.1 Rp.108374 Par Nth Brisbane Quay Central Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002218954

5W45 100 Adelaide St, L.21 (Bal) Sp.207228 Par Nth Brisbane King George Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004972218 Square and Car Park

5W46 348 Edward St, L.4 Rp.202682 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002216065

5W48 333 Ann St, L.1 Rp.808928 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002207031

5W49 179 North Quay, L.15 B.32411 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane Central Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002218913 Courts Building

5W50 300 Adelaide St, L.21 Rp.133052 Par Nth Brisbane Commonwealth Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002201737 Courts Building

5W51 89 Mary St, L.5 Rp.202845 Par Nth Brisbane 80 Albert Street Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002196598

5W52 119 Charlotte St, L.1 Sp.150759 Par Nth Brisbane Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000004120842

5W53 107 North Quay, L.6 B.118221 Par Nth Brisbane Inns of Court Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002218947

5W54 193 North Quay, L.8 B.118228 Par Nth Brisbane B P House Brisbane City RIMS Act# 500000002218798

15.5 Criteria for determining categorisation for differential rating categories 8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 8e, 8f, 8g, 8h, 8i, 8j and 8k from 1 July 2017

Ref. Rateable property Real property description Commonly Differential rating address known as category (if named)

8A1 9 Brookfield Road, L.1 SL.12534 Par Indooroopilly Kenmore Village 8a. Kenmore RIMS Act# 500000004372963 Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group A 8A2 142 Newmarket Road, L.1 SP.146479 Par Enoggera Home Zone Windsor Windsor RIMS Act# 500000004036352

8B1 55 Creek Road, L.1 RP.180967 Par Bulimba Mt Gravatt Plaza 8b. Mt Gravatt East RIMS Act# 500000000250837 Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group B

8C1 551 Lutwyche Road, L.9/10 RP.19093 & L.5 RP.842880 & Lutwyche City 8c. Lutwyche L.1 SP.242892 Par Enoggera Large Regional RIMS Act# 500000005012590 Shopping Centre – Group C

8C2 11 Pavilions Close, L.10 SP.160043 Par Oxley D F O Jindalee Jindalee RIMS Act# 500000004213332

8D1 1909 Creek Road, L.5 RP.121447 Par Bulimba Cannon Hill Kmart 8d. Cannon Hill RIMS Act# 500000000111948 Plaza Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group D 8D2 815 Zillmere Road, L.1 RP.805963 Par Nundah Homemaker City Aspley RIMS Act# 500000001532687 Aspley

8E1 215 Church Road, L.4 SP.145646 Par Kedron Taigum Square 8e. Taigum RIMS Act# 500000004057325 Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group E 8E2 180 Sinnamon Road, L.2 SP.140553 Par Oxley Jindalee Home Jindalee RIMS Act# 500000003970693

8E3 661 Compton Road, L.1 RP.214796 & L.1 SP.281927 Par Sunnybank Hills Sunnybank Hills Yerrongpilly Shoppingtown RIMS Act# 500000005383199

8F1 400 Stafford Road, L.1 RP.853658 Par Kedron Stafford City 8f. Stafford RIMS Act# 500000001264638 Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group F

8G1 9 Sherwood Road, L.3 RP.211016 & L.1 RP.844743 Par Toowong Village 8g. Toowong Enoggera Large Regional RIMS Act# 500000002165684 Shopping Centre – Group G

8H1 59 Albany Creek L.4 RP.164286 & L.1 RP.198020 Par Aspley Hypermarket 8h. Road, Aspley Kedron Large Regional RIMS Act# 500000001492114 Shopping Centre – Group H

8H2 358 Mains Road, L.20 RP.813380 Par Yeerongpilly Sunnybank Plaza Sunnybank RIMS Act# 500000003144604

8I1 171 Dandenong Road, L.3 SP.108533 Par Oxley Mt Ommaney Centre 8i. Mt Ommaney RIMS Act# 500000003781587 Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group I

8J1 159 Osborne Road, L.5 RP.842671 & L.1 SP.271468 Par Brookside 8j. Mitchelton Enoggera Large Regional RIMS Act# 500000004024028 Shopping Centre – Group J

8K1 1015 Sandgate Road, L.1 RP.202924 Par Toombul Toombul Shopping 8k. Nundah RIMS Act# 500000001941466 Centre Large Regional Shopping Centre – Group K

15.6 Criteria for determining categorisation for differential rating categories 9a, 9b, 9c and 9d from 1 July 2017

9A1 322 Moggill Road, L.1 SP.265258 & L.147 SP.265257 & Indooroopilly 9a. Indooroopilly TL.06/211040 - L.7 SP.112975 Par Shopping Centre Major Regional Indooroopilly Shopping Centre – RIMS Act# 500000005403757 Group A

9B1 1151 Creek Road, L.2 RP.909241 Par Bulimba Westfield Carindale 9b. Carindale RIMS Act# 500000004096067 Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group B

9C1 2049 Logan Road, L.1 SP.265246 Par Yeerongpilly Westfield Garden 9c. Upper Mt Gravatt RIMS Act# 500000005437847 City Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group C

9D1 395 Hamilton Road, L.1 SP.192393 Par Kedron Westfield Chermside 9d. Chermside RIMS Act# 500000004535361 Major Regional Shopping Centre – Group D

15.7 Criteria for determining categorisation for differential rating categories 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e, 2f, 2g, 2h, 2i, 2j and 2k from 1 July 2017

2B1 603 Coronation Drive, L.10 RP.209688 Par Enoggera Toowong Village 2b. Toowong RIMS Act# 500000002165726 Car Park Commercial/Non- Residential – Group B

2C1 52 Alfred Street, L.1 SP.196979 & L.40 (BAL) Valley Metro 2c. Fortitude Valley SP.196964 Par Nth Brisbane Shopping Centre Commercial/Non- RIMS Act# 500000004733644 Residential – Group C

2D1 600 Gregory Tce, L.112/115 703 & 705 SP.288048 & RNA Showgrounds 2d. Bowen Hills L.116/117&704 SP. Par North Commercial/Non- Brisbane Residential – RIMS Act# 500000005579580 Group D

2D2 595 Gregory Tce, L.709 SP.238200 Par North Brisbane Bowen Hills RIMS Act# 500000005241918

2D3 41 Costin Tce, L.117 SP.238200 Par North Brisbane Bowen Hills RIMS Act# 500000005241801

2D4 20 King Street, L.2 SP.238202 Par North Brisbane Bowen Hills RIMS Act# 500000005294339

2D5 10 Symes St, L.121 SP.238200 Par North Brisbane Bowen Hills RIMS Act# 500000005241843

2D6 191b Constance St, L.120 SP.238200 Par North Brisbane Bowen Hills RIMS Act# 500000005241835

2D8 665 Gregory Tce, L.109,110 &111 SP.288047 Par North Bowen Hills Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005579853

2D10 639 Gregory Tce, L.801 & 803 SP.288047 Par North Bowen Hills Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005579861

2D11 11 King St, L.802 SP.288047 Par North Brisbane Bowen Hills RIMS Act# 500000005493428

2D12 29 King St, L.804-809 SP.288047 Par North Bowen Hills Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005579879

2D13 492 St Pauls Tce, L.107 SP.238200 & L.108,811 & 815 Bowen Hills SP.288047 Par North Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005579887

2D14 25 King St, L.106 SP.288047 & L.813 & 913 Bowen Hills SP.288076 Par North Brisbane RIMS Act# 500000005579911

2E1 590 Mains Rd, Nathan L.4 SP.272422 Par Yeerongpilly Queensland Sport 2e. RIMS Act# 500000005213925 & Athletic Centre Commercial/Non- Residential – Group E

2F1 1699 Old Cleveland L.1(BAL) SP.150590 Par Tingalpa Sleeman Sports 2f. Rd, Chandler RIMS Act# 500000004129793 Complex Commercial/Non- Residential – Group F

2G1 222 Stanworth Rd, L.48/49 SP.151264 & L.45/46 Brisbane 2g. Boondall SP.284827 Par Kedron Entertainment Commercial/Non- RIMS Act# 500000005385293 Centre Residential – Group G

2H1 40 Castlemaine St, L.581 RP.227070 & L.354 RP.898660 Suncorp Stadium 2h. Milton & L.41 RP.904552 & L.471 Commercial/Non- SP.144611 & L.42 SP.161089 & Residential – L.357 SP.161706 Par Nth Brisbane Group H RIMS Act# 500000005129071

2I1 190 King Arthur Tce, L.7 SP.214201 Par Yeerongpilly Queensland Tennis 2i. Tennyson RIMS Act# 500000004714784 Centre Commercial/Non- Residential – Group I

2J1 411 Vulture St, L.2 RP.803783 & TL.06/208598 - The Brisbane 2j. Woolloongabba L.100 CP.900152 & L.101 SP.120175 Cricket Ground Commercial/Non- & TL.06/218434 - L.103 SP.134698 & (Part thereof) Residential – L.104 SP.179933 Par Sth Brisbane Group J RIMS Act# 500000004774481

2K1 401 Vulture St, L.3/4 SP.182798 Par Sth Brisbane The Brisbane 2k. Woolloongabba RIMS Act# 500000004859746 Cricket Ground Commercial/Non- (Part thereof) Residential – Group K

15.8 Criteria for determining categorisation for differential rating categories 18 and 19 from 1 July 2017

Rateable Real property description Commonly Differential rating category property known as address (if named)

537 Stanley St, L.50&54/62 RP.11625 & L.1 RP.11630 Mater Public 18. South Brisbane & L.43/46 RP.11633 & L.2 RP.185046 Hospital Commercial/Non-Residential – & L.3 SP.163361 & L.1 SP.227481 & (Part thereof) Special Concession L.6 SP.241935 & L.5 SP.241936 & TL.06/213427 - L.100 & TL.06/213426 - L.101 SP.119005 & TL.06/232181 - L.100 SP.192428 Par Sth Brisbane (L.6 & TL.06/213426 - L.101 & TL.06/213427 - L.100 SP.119005 & TL.06/232181 - L.100 SP.192428 - Closed Road Strata (Volumetric Lots) RIMS Act# 500000005258771

Rateable Real property description Commonly Differential rating category property known as address (if named)

547 Ann St, L.1/2 SP.268187 PAR Nth Brisbane All Hallows’ 19. Fortitude Valley RIMS Act# 500000005266519 School CTS -Commercial/Non-Residential – (Part thereof) Special Concession

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 62 LORD MAYOR’S BUDGET SPEECH 2017-18:

The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK) advised that a copy of each Budget Submission for the 2017-18 Financial Year, including the Lord Mayor’s Budget Speech 2017-18, Brisbane City Council Budget 2017-18, and the Brisbane City Council Schedule of Rates and Charges 2017-18, had been placed in front of each Councillor and a full set of Budget Documents had been tabled. He delivered the following speech in support of the 2017-18 budget.

LORD MAYOR: Madam Chairman, it is an honour for me to present the 2017-18 Brisbane City Council budget, my seventh as LORD MAYOR of Brisbane. I am delighted to be able to do this as leader of a team driven to delivering our commitments made during the 2016 election campaign. The budget reflects our ongoing dedication and enthusiasm towards keeping Brisbane on the right track. Brisbane is a great place to live, work and relax. It’s a safe, vibrant, green and prosperous city, valued for its friendly and enjoyable lifestyle. Every day Brisbane City Council works with residents and local communities to help make our city what it is today, with a long-term vision for the future. It’s that vision and focus that has Brisbane heading in the right direction. My team is delivering congestion-busting road projects, Australia’s most modern public transport, including the Brisbane Metro, as well as parks and vibrant, liveable communities that all residents deserve, along with our aim to support small business, increase economic growth and create new jobs. Madam Chairman, this budget is underpinned by our five-point plan presented to Brisbane residents in March last year, which included: continuing to take action on traffic congestion; delivering modern public and active transport systems; a clean, green and sustainable city; building our local economy and creating new jobs for the future; and increasing the leisure and lifestyle opportunities of our city. By delivering on our five-point plan, our vision involves improving the quality of life for residents, while ensuring our city has the services and infrastructure to meet the needs of future generations. Madam Chairman, in last year’s budget, I spoke about the history of delivery by this Administration. Today I want to repeat those words to ensure all residents and Councillors in this Chamber are constantly reminded of the importance of this journey, and why research constantly shows Brisbane is a better place to live now than it was 10 years ago. We have delivered essential road infrastructure which will serve the city well over the coming years, with major projects like the CLEM7, Go Between Bridge, Legacy Way, and the Eleanor Schonell Bridge, as well as hundreds of millions of dollars spent on important suburban road and street upgrades. We have delivered over 1,100 new buses, 12 new CityCats, the Blue and Maroon CityGliders, new flood-resilient CityCat terminals, and our 100% air-conditioned and low-floor accessible bus fleet. We are now a city of lights, with more festivals, more library services, better bikeways, expanded free Wi-Fi, and more community hubs for all residents. Madam Chairman, we have again been named Australia’s Most Sustainable City, cut littering in our city, created new destination parks like Frew Park in Milton and Ken Fletcher Park in Tennyson, and undertaken many park upgrades, with the inclusion of outdoor gyms and all-ability equipment. We have established environment centres, and our successful Green Heart fairs across the city continue to grow. This does not happen by accident. So I want to acknowledge my LNP team and the hard work of all Council officers, subcontractors, unions and importantly, Brisbane residents, who help make our city a better place. Together we have achieved a lot, but there is much more to be done. Madam Chairman, in this budget we continue to deliver on our city’s critical infrastructure needs. It includes many new and exciting leisure and lifestyle

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 63 opportunities for residents and visitors. This budget also sets the plan for the future public transport needs in our city, with the Brisbane Metro debt funding plan now being a reality. Madam Chairman, unlike ALP governments, this LNP Administration will get the balance of infrastructure delivery, responsible financial management, job creation and our lifestyle right. This budget is about improving the economic prosperity of the city. Before you today, we have the 2017-18 budget documents, and I will now note and highlight the changes to the programs within this budget. These changes are made to ensure we deliver on our five-point plan towards a better Brisbane, as I mentioned earlier. We have changed the order and names of programs to better reflect the way in which our city’s needs are changing and evolving. The programs will now be known as: Program 1, Transport for Brisbane; Program 2, Infrastructure for Brisbane; Program 3, Clean, Green and Sustainable City; Program 4, Future Brisbane; Program 5, Lifestyle and Community Services; Program 6, Customer Service; Program 7, Economic Development; and Program 8, City Governance. I will speak in more detail about these programs as this speech progresses, and I look forward to debating and elaborating on these programs over the coming week. Madam Chairman, it is with great pride that I can announce a modest budget, which I believe not only ticks all the boxes when it comes to retaining our strong credit rating, but it also allocates enough funds to deliver on our promise to be the majority funder of the Brisbane Metro. Both of these achievements are critical in ensuring that we keep Brisbane on the right track. I make no apologies for making sure that our city keeps pace in regards to infrastructure delivery, public transport delivery, taking action on traffic congestion and maintaining a superior lifestyle to anywhere else in Australia. These key platforms are underpinned strongly by a budget that I present to the Chamber today. Madam Chairman, this Administration over the past 13 years has never shied away from making the hard decisions to ensure we keep Brisbane heading in the right direction, making us the envy of our southern counterparts in Sydney and Melbourne. We continue to keep our workforce strongly connected with the business of Council, and maintain the operating efficiencies required to keep the lid on any large increases in staff numbers. That said, we keep staff numbers at a level required to ensure our core business of delivery for the people of Brisbane remains at a high level. As an Administration, we will continue our endeavours to drive value for money for the ratepayers of this city, and unashamedly I say: “this is responsible financial management”. We exist for no other reason than to provide service to our city and its people, and I am very proud of our Council employee family and the job that they do. Madam Chairman, I want to make mention of the great rewards that ratepayers are receiving via the existence of our city’s future fund, the City of Brisbane Investment Corporation (CBIC). CBIC has delivered dividends to the Council over the past years which have assisted us in keeping rates increases at the lowest possible levels, while advancing Brisbane as a New World City. This record continues this year, with a contribution that is equivalent to around two per cent of rates, Madam Chairman. In addition, in recent times we have seen through their investments the delivery of two fabulous libraries at Wynnum and Chermside. The previous Labor administration did not have the foresight to do this. We saw last year the ALP again say they would cash in the future fund and squander that money. Madam Chairman, today I announce that, in the 2017-18 financial year, the average increase in rates for owner-occupied residential properties will be 2.4%. For owner-occupiers, this average rates increase equates to $9.41 per quarter, or

$0.72 per week. The average increase to Council’s fees and charges will also be 2.4%. Madam Chairman, with the continued investment in much-needed infrastructure, my team have worked hard to keep this increase as low as possible, while still providing sound economic management. This budget is delivered with the continued burden of public transport subsidies and contributions made by this Council of over $123 million, a cost borne by state governments everywhere else in Australia. Madam Chairman, taking real action on traffic congestion, while delivering smoother suburban streets, means getting residents home quicker and safer with more travel options. Our Transport for Brisbane and Infrastructure for Brisbane programs offer projects and initiatives required to keep Brisbane moving. Projects attacking congestion, including road maintenance, key arterial upgrades, bus purchases, bikeway projects and an upgraded CityCat network, are all included in this field. Past Labor Councils attempted to coerce people into how they will travel to work, with a forced approach to transport solutions, whereas this integrated approach allows Brisbane commuters a real choice on how they commute to and from home. I have stated it many times over the past 18 months, and I will continue to remind the Chamber that Council is investing $1.3 billion into more than 90 road projects over four years to tackle traffic congestion and boost safety across Brisbane. A recent poll and subsequent commentary from the Infrastructure Association of Queensland shows that residents rated transport congestion and a long list of road projects across the State as a priority. My team has a record of delivery on road resurfacing and arterial road projects, and this continues in this budget, as it has for the past 13 years of LNP Government in this place. Following on from the successful delivery of the TransApex tunnel and bridge network over the past 13 years, we are now under way with three major projects that are critical to our city’s future infrastructure requirements. Madam Chairman, for those people living on the northside of Brisbane, they will be aware of the significant works being undertaken on Kingsford Smith Drive. This $650 million project is well advanced, and this budget sees an allocation of $223 million this financial year. The entry statement to our city is undergoing transformational works, and commuters will have a much better experience once the project is completed in 2019. This project is also creating more than 3,000 direct and indirect jobs in our city. It should never be forgotten that the Labor Opposition in this Chamber planned to tear up the contract, costing ratepayers tens of millions of dollars in doing so. In November last year, I was delighted to announce the successful tenderer for the widening of the Inner City Bypass between Legacy Way and the RNA tunnel to four lanes each way. As part of this upgrade, Council will deliver new and improved on and off ramps and bus priority measures. This budget sees $9.5 million allocated towards this project. I have noted that the Greens representative in this Chamber wants to reduce the Lytton Road, Wynnum Road corridor to one general traffic lane in each direction. This will not deter my team from delivering this project, with $29.6 million in this year’s budget towards Stage 1 and Stage 1B works, which includes widening Lytton Road to three lanes in each direction. Other key arterial roads to get new or additional funds in the 2017 budget are as follows: Telegraph Road, Stage 1 and 2, $81 million; Stapylton Road and Johnson Road intersection upgrade, $10.3 million; Player Street connection, $8.7 million; Murphy Road and Ellison Road roundabout upgrade, $8.7 million; Green Camp Road, $8.6 million; Beckett and Hamilton Roads, $3.6 million; and Waterworks Road, $1.9 million.

This is just a taste of the myriad of projects currently under way, and they will be complemented by many road network solutions being delivered by Council, such as the bridge and culvert work, $14 million; LED street lighting, $2 million; traffic light signal modernisation at $4.1 million; flashing warning signs, $1.8 million; and integrated parking management measures of $10.1 million, all of which are included in this year’s budget. So my team will continue to take real action on traffic congestion so that we can all spend less time commuting and more time living. Madam Chairman, before I get into the detail of what we will deliver for public transport users this year, I want to make a reference to a 2016 election commitment whereby I said my team would ‘fight for fairer fares’. Council was concerned about the loss of transport patronage that came with increasing fares by 15% per year. With the downward adjustment to fares, the challenge now exists to get those lost patrons to return to using public transport. Let’s never forget that Council collects the fares, but 100% of those fares go to the State Government. I said it earlier—Brisbane ratepayers are more than doing their fair bit when it comes to contributing over $123 million towards public transport operating subsidies, something covered by state governments, not councils, throughout Australia. Affordability, reliability and quality are key ingredients in the public transport equation. Council is doing a lot of the heavy lifting, and I implore the State Government to have TransLink take real action now. Madam Chairman, as I have mentioned several times over the past few months, the LNP team takes bus driver and passenger safety very seriously. In the 2017-18 budget year, I have allocated $1.29 million towards implementing the recommendations from the Council’s bus safety review completed earlier this year. We will complete the Generation 1 CityCat re-life project with $1.8 million allocated in the 2017-18 budget year, and we will commence planning for the Generation 2 CityCat refurbishments. Madam Chairman, as an inclusive and accessible city, we must do all that we can to ensure all residents and visitors are able to navigate their way around Brisbane. In 2017-18 budget year, we will continue to roll out new accessible bus stops and ferry terminal upgrades, to ensure we are doing all that we can in an area with $6 million towards the bus stop upgrades, and $11 million allocated to ferry terminal upgrades. Madam Chairman, during the past 15 months, since the 2016 election, my team have been working on the comprehensive business case for the Brisbane Metro. It was my great pleasure to stand alongside the DEPUTY MAYOR, Adrian SCHRINNER, in May this year, as promised, to publicly release the Brisbane Metro Business Case. This is a momentous leap forward for the future of public transport in our city, and as I mentioned earlier, Council will be the major funder of this project. Within this budget, allocations of $430 million have been made, and will make this a reality. The cost to deliver Brisbane Metro, including the depot and rolling stock, is $944 million. The funding model is predicated on two-thirds of the funding being provided by Council, and one-third from other sources. Council is committed to working closely with the Queensland and Australian Governments and other important stakeholders, to fully realise the benefits of the Brisbane Metro. The business case for Brisbane Metro confirms the project is a value for money investment in our public transport network, which will provide significant benefits to both the city and the region. Recognising the need to act, I announced Brisbane Metro in early 2016 as a way of addressing Brisbane’s inner city bus network congestion issues. Through a detailed options assessment process, Council identified a solution that introduces a network of high

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 66 frequency, high capacity metro services, over 21 kilometres of existing busway infrastructure. The business case confirms it is a cost effective solution unlocking the potential of the existing busway infrastructure, and lays the foundation for future growth. The Brisbane Metro will deliver high frequency, ‘turn up and go’ metro services; increase the capacity of the busway network; reduce bus congestion on the busway in the CBD and inner city; improve travel times and reliability—less time commuting, more time living; and free up buses to allow more services in the suburbs. The Brisbane Metro delivers considerably greater benefits than any single solution to addressing Brisbane’s bus capacity and congestion issues. Without new investment in public transport, there will be insufficient capacity to support future population and employment growth, and maintain Brisbane’s status as a New World City. Madam Chairman, activation of our river is a priority for this Administration. The South Bank precinct and Riverlife at Kangaroo Point are two great examples of the offering our river can provide. The recent start to the Howard Smith Wharves project, and Destination Brisbane project, make for exciting times ahead for Brisbane. There is also a real need to make Moreton and Stradbroke Islands more accessible to tourists. In this budget, I am happy to announce that I have allocated nearly $8 million towards new river-based opportunities. These opportunities include opening up public moorings and leisure offerings in the CBD, New Farm and Dutton Park. Planning will commence immediately after this budget process, and will include public moorings for tour boats travelling to the islands. This means you will be able to board from the CBD, changing what is currently a lengthy car ride to Pinkenba, Cleveland or Fisherman Island. New drop-off and pick-up locations for our river party boats like the Kookaburra Queen, and tourism boats like the Mirimar, which travel daily to Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary. These moorings will also allow for private boat owners to drop off and pick up passengers and park short-term, to enjoy the restaurants and facilities at these locations. To complement our River’s Edge Strategy, we will also offer another leisure-based activity in Dutton Park, providing canoeing and kayak adventures. Another exciting opportunity is for the provision of a water taxi service. We are excited that the Destination Brisbane precinct at Queen’s Wharf and the Howard Smith Wharves teams have announced they are also interested in having water taxis to these new facilities which will provide additional new drop-off points to allow people to get around our river city. To complement these new projects, we will also deliver public moorings and pontoons at South Bank and West End, with a $2.7 million allocation in this year’s budget. River developments are riddled with bureaucratic approval processes, with many fingers in the pie. I simply ask other authorities to adopt a ‘make it happen’ approach in the interests of Brisbane and its future. I am delighted to be able to deliver these new opportunities, and I encourage all stakeholders to cut through the bureaucracy and work with me to make it happen. Madam Chairman, keeping Brisbane clean, green and sustainable is about making our city more liveable and sustainable for our children and their children to follow. We have a lot to be proud of, with our clean air, the richest biodiversity of any city in Australia, over 35% natural habitat cover, and on track to achieve 40% by 2031, and generous green spaces for our community to enjoy, with almost 2,100 parks across our city. Our commitment to sustainability has twice earned us the accolade of Australia’s Most Sustainable City. Demonstrating leadership in sustainability throughout our own operations, Council has achieved full carbon neutral status,

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 67 making it Australia’s largest 100% carbon neutral organisation. Our direct financial commitment is $5.9 million in the 2017-18 financial year. I mentioned our almost 2,100 parks earlier, and we will continue to deliver new parks as opportunities arise. In the 2017-18 budget I have allocated more than $36 million towards key city park upgrades, metropolitan and district playgrounds, park infrastructure, improvement programs and neighbourhood park upgrades. In addition to the $36 million, I have allocated $4.4 million for park infrastructure, gym equipment and landscape upgrades, and a further $1.4 million for play safe upgrades. This year, Council has increased its expenditure on drainage maintenance and enhancement by $5 million, or 5.6%. This funding will manage the delivery of new and upgraded infrastructure to support and facilitate development as well as provide relief from localised flooding for established residents and businesses through major and minor projects. This funding will also continue Council’s commitment of asset maintenance through our minor works, such as cleaning pipes and stormwater drains, and replacing manholes and grates. Projects include almost $2.5 million each on both Gordon Park, Bardon and Jamieson Street, Bulimba. Madam Chairman, as part of the 2016 election campaign, I made a significant commitment to make Mt Coot-tha more accessible and upgrade the facilities to allow more visitors to enjoy this great Brisbane space, second in visitations behind South Bank. Earlier this year I was excited to see the expressions of interest for delivery of our new zip line on Mt Coot-tha. In the 2017-18 budget year, I have allocated $710,000 to get this process moving, with the aim of having people zipping down the mountain in 2019. In addition to the zip line, we will continue delivering new walking trails and the upgrades to Simpsons and J.C. Slaughter Falls, with allocations of $1 million and $2 million respectively for these works in 2017-18. In relation to the new Koala Research Centre that I announced last year, I am delighted that we have progressed our discussions with Lone Pine Sanctuary, and in this budget I have allocated $2.4 million towards progressing this initiative. Protecting Australia’s most iconic species, coupled with the economic opportunities this facility will create, is an exciting prospect. The Northern Suburbs Environment Centre planning will commence with the aim of construction to commence in 2018, with an allocation of $4.6 million over the next three years. Only two weeks ago at the Council meeting, we debated and approved the new providers for waste collection, recycling and green waste. This is a massive undertaking, and a key customer service contract for Council, so I would like to thank all of the officers involved in this lengthy process. A new waste stream initiative in this year’s budget is the Love Food Hate Waste program. This initiative is an internationally recognised program which will help residents to make the most out of the food that we love. By rethinking how we shop, plan our meals and use our leftovers, we can make a difference. Simply put, it’s keeping food out of the bin. Tree trimming and grass cutting are important services in our city. Today our parks, traffic islands and verges are mown far more frequently than they were during the years of Labor Administration. Our city sees continued growth in the number of trees on our streets and in our parks, and to reflect this, I have increased the allocation for tree trimming in this budget to $16 million, which represents a five per cent increase. Madam Chairman, I am proud to say that Brisbane is well on the way to becoming a global leader in sustainability, and I look forward to meeting new targets and challenges in the years to come. As an upcoming global leader in sustainability, Council is committed to keeping the Brisbane Australia’s New World City tag. We have seen so much growth in our local economy since launching the Windows of Opportunity plan in 2011, and then the subsequent 2022 New World City Action Plan.

Madam Chairman, when it comes to championing Brisbane, our marketing and economic arm, Brisbane Marketing, have developed a strong reputation throughout Australia. Research conducted in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne during 2017 identified four key areas of strength which have been used to develop the ‘Brisbane Now’ interstate marketing campaign. These key areas are: quality of life; growth, momentum and opportunity; ease of doing business; and a welcoming, relaxed, safe and secure city. With the success of the campaign so far, an additional $600,000 has been allocated in the 2017-18 budget year, to continue this campaign into interstate markets. There is always much criticism, Madam Chairman, of the CityCycle network from those in the Labor Party opposite. Today I can announce that the value of media and marketing collateral that we’ve received from the JCDecaux contract now exceeds $3.7 million, allowing us to make advertising placements interstate and across the globe. In 2017, we have advertised in Melbourne, Sydney, Beijing and Tokyo, just to name a few key markets, advertising the great events presented in our city. We are quickly becoming a destination of choice for more major events, and I have ensured that in the 2017-18 budget, there has been an increase in leisure, tourism, conventions and major events allocations to $6.3 million. Over the next financial year, residents and visitors will get to experience first-hand some great experiences, such as: the Battle of Brisbane in July at Suncorp Stadium; the Global Rugby Tens, the Rugby League World Cup, and the Bledisloe Cup also at Suncorp Stadium; Regional Flavours at South Bank; a revamped Mercedes Benz Fashion Festival; and a new signature event which will be added to the calendar during the coming year. In the next financial year, our focus will continue with Study Brisbane, working in key world markets to identify and attract more international students to visit and spend time and money in our city. Supporting small business remains a focus of our SME Liaison Officer, who will continue to get out into the suburbs, working with small businesses, to ensure they are getting maximum value for their part, the Brisbane landscape. This will be complemented by our very popular small business forums throughout the suburbs. Madam Chairman, in this budget, I have allocated an additional $250,000 towards a precinct development study, and in particular, it will have a focus upon economic development opportunities, aligning closely with the Brisbane Metro corridor, and the Brisbane River tourism infrastructure investment spoken about earlier. From an investment attraction point of view, we are on track to exceed $680 million in economic impact during this financial year. This includes major project investments such as: Asahi at Heathwood; Super Amart at Rochedale; Banyan Tree at Kangaroo Point; the Holiday Inn at Spring Hill; and Novotel at South Brisbane, along with the Student One accommodation offerings in the city. All of these projects are bringing new investment and creating new jobs in Brisbane. I think it is appropriate to highlight a few key facts in relation to tourism in our city from 2016-17. International and domestic visitors have increased to seven million visitations per annum. Direct flights from Guangzhou and Shanghai have made China the number one source market for Brisbane. Growth in visitor numbers from Canada of 31% and from Japan, 56%. The hotel investment strategy has seen more than 2,000 new hotel rooms delivered since 2014 and a further 3,000 rooms in the pipeline. One of our future tourism priorities for Brisbane will include the development of additional products and experiences that can be packaged for international markets. Madam Chairman, we know a Labor-led Council would scrap

Brisbane Marketing. This would mean the economic growth and enormous value it brings to our city and the jobs created from it, as described above, would disappear overnight. I do want to highlight that a liveable city is about more than just new jobs and better roads. Being able to deliver more lifestyle and leisure options means exciting events and vibrant local markets across the city, with better facilities and venues for residents of all ages to enjoy. Madam Chairman, when speaking about festivals and events funded across this city, I am so proud to be able to attend so many, as I know many of you do, across this Chamber on a weekly basis. Signature events such as the Brisbane Festival, Queensland Music Festival and the Brisbane Writers Festival offer world class entertainment, and this budget includes funding of $2.2 million towards these great events. The vibrancy these festivals bring to the fabric of our city and the suburbs is unparalleled, and in this budget I am happy to allocate $760,000 towards community festivals, $546,000 towards cultural festivals, and $297,000 towards Indigenous cultural events, as well as $368,000 to supported organisations like the Brisbane Symphony Orchestra and the Queensland Youth Orchestra. The Brisbane Powerhouse continues to deliver eclectic entertainment as an all-round, great experience for visitors to the theatre, and the bars and restaurants in the precinct. The budget allocates funding of $300,000 towards the improvement of the Powerhouse and surrounds through a master planning exercise. The Powerhouse themselves will provide $200,000 towards this exercise. 2018 marks the 30th anniversary of Expo 88 which, along with the 1982 Commonwealth Games, marked a turning point for Brisbane and our city came of age. In this budget, I have allocated $555,000 towards ‘Giving Brisbane a Better Tourist Day’, which predominantly includes identifying and obtaining artworks from the Expo 88 era and relocating them to key citywide locations for all residents and visitors to enjoy. Part of this funding will also be to ensure that we maximise opportunities created by the influx of visitors to the 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games, coupled with the opportunities created by the ever increasing effectiveness of the Brisbane Greeters program. Madam Chairman, I said at the start of this speech that my team has a reliable five-point plan to keep Brisbane on the right track. I am confident that this budget continues the journey to develop Brisbane as Australia’s New World City. I am delighted that the new programs outlined in this budget will keep us heading in the right direction and deliver more value for Brisbane ratepayers, residents and visitors. Madam Chairman, delivery of this budget would not have been possible without the assistance of many people within Council. I would like to personally thank my LNP team members, particularly Finance Chairman, Councillor Krista ADAMS, Councillor Ryan MURPHY, Mr Greg Bowden, Mr Chris Anstey, Mr Nick Kennedy and Mr Chris Kelly, and my office for their assistance in formulating the budget and their ongoing commitment to responsible financial management. I want to acknowledge the support provided by the Chief Executive Officer, Colin Jensen, and the Chief Financial Officer, Paul Oberle, and to Mark Russell and the budget team, and I acknowledge Paul Salvati and Mr Bill Lyon also for their assistance in this budget process. To all Council staff, I offer my thanks for your hard work and the dedication towards making Brisbane a better place to live, work and play. Madam Chairman, I commend this budget to the Chamber.

ADJOURNMENT FOR PROGRAM INFORMATION SESSIONS: 645/2016-17 At that time, 11.41am, it was resolved on the motion of the LORD MAYOR, seconded by the DEPUTY MAYOR, that the meeting adjourn until 9am on Friday 16 June 2017.

UPON RESUMPTION:

SECOND DAY – Friday 16 June 2017

PRESENT:

The Chairman of Council, Councillor Angela OWEN, declared the adjourned meeting open and called for apologies.

The Chairman of Council, Councillor Angela OWEN then called upon the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Peter CUMMING, to present his response to the LORD MAYOR’s budget.

THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION’S BUDGET RESPONSE:

Councillor CUMMING: Madam Chair, the essence of this budget is pure and simple—it’s a clear case of LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK, shamelessly forcing residents to pay for his financial incompetence and the incompetence of Committee Chairs like Councillor ADAMS and Councillor SCHRINNER. It’s exactly the sort of spin we’ve come to expect from a Mayor addicted to seeing himself on the TV every night. That’s right, Madam Chair, Councillor QUIRK has put his vast PR (Public Relations) army into the field to spin thin air into air time. They passed off an $8 million river announcement as a grand $43 million plan. They’ve rehashed old roads announcements like Telegraph Road into a congestion plan. They’ve made a big deal out of core Council business like filling potholes. It’s a desperate attempt by a tired LNP Council to paint this

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 72 budget as a visionary document for Brisbane’s future. It’s nothing of the sort. It’s a mishmash of repeat announcements Councillor QUIRK parades as a plan. 2016-17 has been a disastrous year of financial bungles. Let’s take a look at some of the lowlights. Sixty million dollars of ratepayers’ hard-earned money wasted on an IT contract blowout; $60 million, Madam Chair. Imagine what $60 million would have bought for the people of Brisbane—security guards on buses, water rebates for pensioners, eight pools, 130 new buses. But no, Madam Chair, the LORD MAYOR and his inept Finance Chair, Councillor ADAMS, sent that $60 million off into cyberspace, never to be seen again. It’s a staggering blunder. But it doesn’t end there. The same pair were at the wheel when this lazy LNP Council was duped out of $450,000 by a crew of half-baked fraudsters—$450,000 up in smoke, lost to a scam that Council was warned about, lost to a scam that the Gympie Council was awake to, lost to a scam that Bundaberg Council was alert to. But not the QUIRK LNP Administration, Madam Chair, no, they fell for this fraud hook, line and $450,000 sinker. How could the people in charge of the purse strings for Australia’s largest local government be taken as such chumps? Was it laziness, incompetence, arrogance? No, Madam Chair, it was all of the above. Did the LORD MAYOR or Councillor ADAMS stand up and take responsibility for their mess? No, they sacked a Council employee then put their hands in residents’ pockets to pay the bill. They were prepared to fritter away more millions by offering an LNP donor a piece of ratepayers’ land for $3.3 million. When an outcry forced the sale to tender, as it should have been all along, the land realised $5.5 million. Does the LORD MAYOR apologise for this litany of failure? Not on your life, Madam Chair. Instead of offering a humble apology to the people of Brisbane, LORD MAYOR QUIRK cocked his chin in the air and told residents they should be thankful for a 2.4% average rate rise. Let’s take a look at the detail of how Councillor QUIRK believes he can justify this latest rates slug that brings his tally to 23.5% during his time as LORD MAYOR. Madam Chair, the QUIRK LNP Administration has brought down a budget with an average increase in rates of 2.4%. I can’t stress that word ‘average’ enough. The level of inflation for Brisbane, and indeed the average wage increase over the year to 31 March 2017 is 1.8%, so the rates increase is one-third higher than wages and inflation. In many suburbs the pain will be far worse. Seven Hills faces the biggest slug across the city with a 6.6% increase, so belts will have to be tightened even further to find an extra $116.91 per year. Next comes Sunnybank Hills, 6.4%, $92.23 a year; Mansfield, 6.4%; $92.38; Wishart, 6.4%, $89.26. The list goes on —Sherwood, 6.3%, $116.29; Sunnybank, 6.3%, $99.49; Wakerley, 6.2%, $82.52; Upper Mount Gravatt, 6%, $79.73; and Inala, 6%, $60.45. Inala, Madam Chair, is the essence of working class Brisbane, and now those working class residents for whom every dollar counts, will have to dig deep to find $60 to fund Councillor QUIRK’s big ticket vanity projects. I’ll repeat—the latest increase brings LORD MAYOR QUIRK’s personal tally to 23.5% since his first budget of 2011. This compares to the inflation rate for the period of only 15%. When it comes to other people’s money, LORD MAYOR QUIRK and the LNP are indeed the last of the big spenders. Now, of course there’s been rapid growth in Brisbane, meaning there are many thousands of new property owners paying rates each year. On page 8 of the budget documents, rates and utility charges will increase by $44.6 million this financial year, a rise of 4.2%. It will then jump by $62 million, 5.6%, in 2018-19, and $68.5 million, 5.8%, in 2019-20. So the rapidly growing rates base of extra properties each year provides ample opportunity to pay for Council expenditure without increasing rates for existing ratepayers. Pensioners copped a body blow in last year’s budget when this out of touch Council slashed their water subsidies. I’m sorry to report that the attack on pensioners continues. This year, page 8 shows a continuing fall in discounts and pensioner remissions. In the current 2016-17 financial year, discounts and

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 73 pensioner remissions are projected to cost $43.5 million. They decline by almost $2 million next financial year, then by around $500,000 for each of the two subsequent years. The reduction in the water discount last year, plus the fact it is no longer available to new pensioners or those who have changed address, is kicking in. So if you do the right thing and downsize, freeing up your house for a family to move in, you’re penalised. These cuts outweigh any increase in general rate discounts. Madam Chair, the past 12 months have been a year of financial disasters for Councillor QUIRK and the LNP. Now Brisbane residents are being asked to pay more. It is a pay more, get less budget. It’s not only rates rising. This Council will get you from cradle to grave. In the fees scheduled for cemeteries and crematoria, average increases over the past two years were seven per cent. Madam Chairman, I turn now to the word this Administration should dread. It’s the ‘D’ word—debt. Council is suffering from the costs of carrying an enormous load of debt. I refer to page 9 of the budgeted statement of financial position— total liabilities are projected to be $2.59 billion at the end of the 2017-18 financial year. That’s a massive sum of money, even for the most populous Council in Australia. Alarming as it is, the situation is predicted to get far worse during the 2018-19 year, with total debt ballooning to $2.98 billion. Madam Chair, at a time of historically low interest rates and low inflation, this equates to an alarming rise of 15%, or $390 million. Now, someone might say that is caused by the borrowing for the bus upgrade, the ‘Metro’ misnomer, but on page 22 that is shown not to be the case, with capital for the ‘big bendy banana bus’ project in 2017-18 being only $49.6 million. That covers only about 12% of this worrying increase in liabilities. The QUIRK LNP Council is driving debt through the City Hall roof. They are making it a problem for future generations. The latest population figure on the BCC website shows Brisbane’s local government area is home to 1,162,186 residents, so at the end of 2018-19, the debt for every man, woman and child in Brisbane will be $2,564. That is a Council using debt like steroids. That is a Council addicted to debt. What is driving this debt, Madam Chair? It’s the blatant waste of this LNP Council. Take, for example, the LORD MAYOR wastes millions on PR and marketing, but can’t deliver on basic services in the suburbs. Brisbane Marketing, its board and its highly paid executives, chew up more than $25 million of Council’s budget each year, and what do the business owners across Brisbane get in return? Nothing but glossy brochures proclaiming the marvellous achievements of Brisbane Marketing and its esteemed leader, LORD MAYOR QUIRK. Twenty-five million dollars for no measurable return to our city. Twenty-five million dollars—that’s more than the drainage budget for our flood-prone city. Madam Chair, page 9 of the budget contains figures in relation to cash and cash equivalents that, on the face of it, demand an explanation. It shows between 2016-17 and 2017-18 cash and cash equivalents will drop by $466.2 million— more than 70%—from $638.5 million to only $193.2 million. Where has all the cash gone? Infrastructure—Madam Chair, the LORD MAYOR has boasted that one-third of this year’s budget is going to traffic infrastructure projects. The truth is that this LORD MAYOR is happy to spend $650 million gold-plating one single road to save 60 seconds drive time. Let that sink in—$650 million a minute. That is not good value for money, even according to his own business case for the project. So even with a supposed $1 billion spend, ratepayers shouldn’t be holding their breath expecting traffic congestion to reduce due to the LNP’s road initiative. Labor’s position has consistently been that we would have undertaken a more modest upgrade of Kingsford Smith Drive, but it would have done the same job. We would have spread the remaining half a billion dollars across the city on

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 74 crucial suburban bottlenecks that have been neglected by this Administration for far too long. I find it astounding that LORD MAYOR QUIRK wants a pat on the back for funding road resurfacing, and then claims this is somehow fixing congestion. Road resurfacing is a core Council business, and the truth is, if the LNP hadn’t underspent for the past 13 years, the LORD MAYOR wouldn’t have to spend so much money now playing catch-up. But while he crows about his resurfacing program, there is another basic infrastructure item that he dared not mention, and that is footpaths. People may recall Councillor Graham QUIRK was the Infrastructure Chair who let our footpaths get so bad that, had you laid the dangerous ones end to end, they would have stretched from Brisbane to Bundaberg. As a result, he was forced to establish the Ward Footpaths Trust Fund, a $350,000 fund for each Councillor to deliver footpaths in their wards. But that didn’t last long, because once LORD MAYOR QUIRK had control of the budget, his disregard—or is it disdain, for footpaths once again came to the fore. The standalone footpath fund disappeared. The new fund forced Councillors to choose between local park upgrades or new footpaths. While the historical figures will show there has been a sharp decline in spending on new footpaths since this change, the most concerning thing about the Ward Parks and Footpaths Trust Fund is LORD MAYOR QUIRK’s failure to provide one extra cent for this program since 2012. This is despite inflation and construction cost increases, and despite the rate hikes year on year in successive LNP budgets. Again, this truly is a pay more, get less budget if ever I saw one. Surely as a Council we can do better than this. Madam Chair, I turn to planning and development. When it comes to city planning, it appears that this Administration has finally abandoned its embarrassing Vibrant Laneways project. We all remember when they spent millions of dollars stencilling the bitumen in Burnett Lane, in the hope that it would somehow make it vibrant. But when that didn’t work, they spent more money rolling out AstroTurf and setting up plastic tables and chairs every lunchtime. They reckoned people wouldn’t mind eating their lunch next to garbage bins, while dodging delivering vehicles. When they finally realised that wasn’t going to work, the LNP Council instead tried to claim credit for the good work of Brisbane business who had, off their own bat and with no support from Council, set up truly vibrant laneways in places like Winn and Bakery Lanes. Now they have finally formally dumped the program. It would be nice if they would have the honesty to stand up in this place and apologise for wasting millions of dollars of ratepayers’ dollars on their own folly. I expect we’ll get no apologies, just more arrogance and more waste. Another area of concern to the Opposition is neighbourhood planning. The 2017-18 budget sees less funding provided for neighbourhood planning across Brisbane. Perhaps even the LNP are starting to see the growing disconnect between what neighbourhood plans promise communities, and what they actually deliver. Time after time, plan after plan, we see residents hitting the streets in protest against the very plans this LNP Council claims they asked for. Earlier this week we saw the LNP ram through the Dutton Park-Fairfield neighbourhood plan, Madam Chair. Typical of the way this arrogant Administration operates, this was done without the support of the local Councillors and without the infrastructure plan residents were desperately seeking in their submissions to Council. It’s endemic across Brisbane. For instance, the State Government sent the LNP Council back out to public notification on the Spring Hill neighbourhood plan. This came after their first set of proposed changes were deemed to threaten this historic precinct. Now, residents of Brisbane’s oldest suburb are once again having to fight this Administration to protect and preserve that character that is such a vital part of Brisbane’s history.

The LNP’s third strike was the Coorparoo and districts neighbourhood plan. Who could forget the sterling performance of the bumbling Councillor for Coorparoo? He told hundreds of angry residents it was they who asked for five-storey height increases, it was they who wanted character protections removed from more than a third of their tin and timber homes. What utter rot! It didn’t take the LNP long to hang him out to dry before doing an embarrassing back-flip and watering down their obscene attack on the suburb’s character and amenity. When neighbourhood plans were introduced, Campbell Newman said, and I quote, ‘Through neighbourhood plans, residents will play a direct role in planning their neighbourhood for the future’. He went on, ‘The neighbourhood planning process will encourage ownership and acceptance of planning outcomes, while overcoming the community’s anger at being sidelined from the planning process’. Empty, empty words. Today the LNP Council are so far away from these principles Labor believes we urgently need to press the reset button on the whole program. That’s what a Labor Council would do with neighbourhood planning. We would give power back to the people. We would lift the shameful gag orders that take away the basic human right of community planning team members to talk about the experience. We’re not afraid of consultation and constructive criticism, it makes Brisbane a better place. Importantly, we would ensure every neighbourhood plan has an accompanying local infrastructure plan. This will demonstrate to residents that Council is planning for the infrastructure needs of their neighbourhoods. These local infrastructure plans would go further than the legislatively required LGIP (Local Government Infrastructure Plan), and include a range of projects across key budget programs. Community planning teams would be asked to identify and endorse deliverable projects within the neighbourhood planning area, and give these projects a high, medium or low priority ranking. Projects would then be assigned short, medium and long-term delivery timeframes. Each project would be subject to further consultation with directly impacted neighbourhoods in the design phase. We would listen, not just talk. We believe in true consultation, not lip service. We’re mature enough to cope with views other than our own. We believe a council owes its residents nothing less. A Labor council would report against the delivery of these infrastructure plans annually. We firmly believe this is a much better way to ensure our city plans for the increased infrastructure demands that high density living brings. Madam Chair, I turn to public and active transport—yet another area in which Brisbane residents can have little faith in this tired QUIRK Administration. You have to look at what the LNP does, not what they say. You hear the LORD MAYOR complain about spending money on public transport services a lot in this place. Even in his speech on Wednesday, the LORD MAYOR bemoaned Brisbane’s ongoing investment in public transport, saying it’s something state governments and not councils do throughout Australia. While this is a nice political argument for the LORD MAYOR to make, he knows full well, having served in this place since 1985, that the Brisbane City Council has a very long history of investment in public transport. Given Brisbane is Australia’s most populous local government area, we should be proud of this. It’s what our residents expect, and it’s what they deserve. This Council will receive over $1 billion in public transport funding from the State Government over the next three years to operate our bus and ferry services, something the LORD MAYOR and his Transport Chair conveniently forget. We know that, through decisions this LORD MAYOR has made, there are less buses on our road, more of them stuck in traffic than ever before, and fewer residents choosing to catch public transport. After this LORD MAYOR came to power, the number of buses in Brisbane’s fleet slumped, and still hasn’t recovered. There are still 58 fewer buses on our roads than there were in 2012. How ironic that the $60 million blowout in the IT bungle would have more than covered these 58 new buses.

The LORD MAYOR broke his commitment to build 360 new buses from 2012 to 2016, and the consequence of this lack of investment in public transport is there for everyone to see. The Labor State Government’s decisive action on public transport fares will give an added incentive to people for people to make the shift to public transport. The fairer fares package and zone reform, called for by Rod Harding and Labor in 2016, has delivered a reduction in fares on a scale never seen before. Labor knows cost is a key component in encouraging people to make the shift to public transport. But we also know that investment in public transport infrastructure is crucial to attracting passengers. The LNP’s lack of action on new infrastructure has seen such a serious decline in the number of people choosing to catch public transport in Brisbane. This isn’t serious just because the total number of patrons has declined so much, it’s serious because fewer people on public transport equals more people in cars and more congestion. The congestion on Brisbane roads has had a devastating effect on public transport. Transport Chair, Councillor SCHRINNER’s solution to buses running late from the outer suburbs was to cut services. This does not address the core problem of service reliability and frequency. But Labor provides a comprehensive plan to build new public transport corridors that would boost capacity, frequency and reliability. A combination of modern light rail and building the northern and eastern transit ways would have seen bus travel times slashed and key public transport destinations connected like never before. Cities all over Australia and around the world are investing in transformational light rail projects, while this Administration bangs on about banana buses. The centre of the LORD MAYOR’s election campaign was his so-called Brisbane Metro Subway System. Madam Chair, that was an odd name, given the project turned out to be neither a subway, nor a metro. The LORD MAYOR trumpeted that he would deliver a ‘Paris-style metro’. He triumphantly declared his subway system would carry 30,000 passengers per hour. All of Brisbane now knows that this was all just spin. None of it added up. Yet, to win an election, this arrogant LORD MAYOR was prepared to waste $1.5 billion of ratepayers’ money. The project has in fact morphed into just 60 new banana buses. The business case released last month shows very little in the way of cost breakdowns. It hides the options analyses. It’s more secrecy from an Administration that considers itself above scrutiny. What we do know from the limited information, is that the LORD MAYOR’s preferred option, the one he took to the election, was a distant third when compared to other options. In the face of scathing assessments from transport experts, for once the LORD MAYOR was forced to admit he was just plain wrong. In a humiliating background, this project had to go back to the drawing board, and what emerged was a plan to buy banana buses and build a new underground bus station. Calling this a ‘metro’ is like calling a Nissan Micra a Maserati. This so-called metro doesn’t address bus congestion, it doesn’t address capacity issues for the residents in the eastern and northern suburbs. Residents in the outer northern suburbs are likely to save a modest two minutes in travel time and have to change buses at the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital. The business case also talks about network reform. This means many services are likely to be diverted away from their current destinations to stops along the way. Passengers will be forced to change buses. These serious changes to Brisbane’s bus network have not been properly explained to the residents of Brisbane. I would urge the LNP Council to come clean with the residents and listen to their views. Labor supports the conversion of the Victoria Bridge to a public and active transport corridor. However, the business case for the metro doesn’t outline what other options were considered to achieve this. It doesn’t specify why a new underground bus station at the Cultural Centre with a limited 100-metre

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 77 platform, is the solution that will serve Brisbane residents best. The LORD MAYOR should be big enough to admit it. Development of this project has been flawed from day one. The budget doesn’t have a plan to fully fund this crucial project, with just $429 million of the estimated $944 million total costs committed over the forward estimates. Where’s the money coming from? The State Government have indicated they will not contribute, and the Federal Government have limited their investment in public transport to rail projects. Given the LNP Council has claimed that a third of the costs would come from so-called other sources, there’s a $300 million-plus black hole in this shambolic project. Madam Chair, Labor is always prepared to offer bipartisan support to sensible ideas. In that spirit, we support the $1.2 million investment to implement the recommendation of Council’s bus safety review. Labor Councillors have advocated strongly in this place, and out in the community, for more action on bus driver safety. We will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with our dedicated bus drivers, and we’ll do everything we can to stop the all too frequent assaults. We listened to the drivers. We got first-hand evidence of the dangers they face every single day. In contrast, this arrogant, out of touch Council rejected our plea for drivers to address the Public and Active Transport Committee on their safety concerns. They rejected our plea for this Council to immediately deploy more security guards on targeted routes. Yet they can find millions to pay juicy bonuses to white collar staff. It’s typical of how this Council operates. Madam Chairman, when it comes to active transport in Brisbane, this Administration’s commitment is barely skin deep. The current corporate plan has ditched the mode share goals for active transport to 2020, after all previous targets were missed completely. We’re going backwards. The scrapping of the maligned Bicycle Awareness Zones has now seen hundreds of kilometres removed from Brisbane’s bikeway network. This is a damning indictment on the way the LNP have treated the cycling community in Brisbane over the past eight years. After building just 8.1 kilometres of dedicated bikeway infrastructure, with the previous $120 million budget commitment, cyclists will have little faith that the current $100 million allocation will do any better. It’s more waste, more gold plating, and more financial failure. Labor is committed to working with the cycling community, listening to their needs, and involving them in planning. We would establish a Lord Mayor’s Bicycle User’s Group to get fair dinkum about active transport. We would show leadership and develop a plan for a grid of separated cycle lanes in the CBD. We know that providing safe and dedicated lanes will see a dramatic increase in active transport. A separated grid would also be a shot in the arm for the languishing CityCycle project. We must consider any proposal that will help this failing scheme. The LNP promised it would deliver a big fat cheque to the people of Brisbane. Instead, it has cost us over $17 million, with many more years of losses on the way. More waste, more financial failure. Madam Chair, this Administration promotes Brisbane as, I quote, ‘a clean, green and sustainable city’. Do they back this up with appropriate levels of funding? Sadly, once again the answer is no. The LORD MAYOR’s scalpel has not missed Brisbane’s parks, with a $137,000 cut to the funds used to replace dangerous and dilapidated play equipment. The welfare of our children is too important to gamble with cuts like this. There’s a $148,000 cut to the amount spent on tree maintenance in parks, a 16% reduction. Surely with the severe storms that Brisbane experiences, this is an area that should see increased funding. On top of that, the LNP have ripped $300,000 out of the management of vegetation along our major waterways, and as the population of Brisbane continues to grow, the LNP Council has slashed $366,000 from the citywide litter prevention program.

So, in conclusion, Madam Chair, what does the 2017-18 Brisbane City Council budget leave us with? It leaves the people of Brisbane with a clear indication the days of LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK are numbered. After 32 long years in Council, LORD MAYOR QUIRK is tired, losing interest and devoid of fresh ideas. The LORD MAYOR knows, Madam Chair, that after 32 years, it’s time to put the old stayer out to pasture. Councillor QUIRK is desperate to anoint a suitable, competent successor to lead our beloved city, but there, in the word ‘competent’, lies his problem. The jockeying and horse-trading has already started in the LNP backroom, with backs being scratched, egos being stroked, and paths to the Lord Mayoral limo being laid. But the blinkered LORD MAYOR only sees two options before him, Madam Chair—Councillor SCHRINNER, of the incredible shrinking Brisbane Metro, or the proven financial failure, Councillor ADAMS. It’s a dictionary definition of a dilemma—a choice between two bad options. With the LORD MAYOR on the final furlong, rocketing rates and financial incompetence a recurring theme, election 2020 cannot come quickly enough for the people of Brisbane. Thank you. Chairman: Councillor ADAMS, would you like to respond, please. Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order!

REPLY BY THE CHAIRMAN OF FINANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:

Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair, and I stand to respond to the budget for 2017-18. Chairman: Councillor ADAMS, would you like the lectern before you present? Councillor ADAMS: No, that’s fine, thank you. Chairman: Thank you. Councillor ADAMS: It’s my great pleasure to be here today, Madam Chair, to support this financially responsible balanced budget that we have here before us, a budget that is focused on infrastructure and lifestyle and leisure for the residents, and the visitors to our City of Brisbane. It is true, in recent years, that Council has taken the tough financial decisions to make sure that we continually improve our position in this place. We have refinanced the QUU (Queensland Urban Utilities) loans so that they are borrowing directly from QTC (Queensland Treasury Corporation). We have done transformational projects such as BaSE that will deliver major benefits to the organisation over the next 10 years. We have looked at the concessions rights for Legacy Way and Go Between Bridge to free up capital so that we can do new projects, vital projects, like Wynnum Road and Kingsford Smith Drive. We’ve achieved savings by driving down operating costs and freeing up funds which we have ploughed back into services in our suburbs. On top of that, this has helped us maintain, for over five years, our strong credit rating. Despite all of this, we continue to deliver major infrastructure for the city, infrastructure that should be the responsibility of the State Government—Legacy Way, Go Between Bridge, and now Brisbane Metro. We are the only local government to subsidise public transport operations in South East Queensland, with a subsidy of $123.9 million this year. We’ve delivered services in parks and social infrastructure—Frew Park in Milton, Ken Fletcher Park in Tennyson, we’re rolling out outdoor gyms, we’ve expanded our libraries in Wynnum and Chermside, and we’re delivering new

pools—have delivered new pools at Bracken Ridge and Parkinson, and are looking at upgrades to major pools in the coming 12 months. But, Madam Chair, let us look at what is said by the Opposition—pay more and get less. It is unusual that you see a rates decrease from year on year, and we are being told that they are getting less but paying more. This year the average rate rise is 2.4% for owner-occupied properties. Not only does this fund our core business, but it also funds the infrastructure and services that other cities around Australia do not need to deliver for their residents. We are the majority or a total funder of the infrastructure I mentioned before, and particularly going forwards in Metro. Madam Chair, let’s compare the benefits that you actually receive for your rates, compared to other fees and charges you may pay. For example, vehicle registration. What do you get for your rates? You get $123.9 million subsidy for public transport, you get 650 streets resurfaced, you get 90 congestion-busting suburban road projects, 2,050 parks, 9,500 hectares in conservation reserves, a 24/7 contact centre and business hotline, 33 libraries, 20 pools, a planetarium, Riverstage, Museum of Brisbane, Powerhouse, helping to deliver more than 50,000 markets, festivals and events each year, and a 100% carbon neutral organisation. Let’s compare this to your vehicle registration, which is not much less than your average rates annual bill in Brisbane, where you get your car on to the road. So, I’m thinking, what we get in this budget is very, very good bang for your buck. We have never in this Administration, never increased rates more than six per cent. The ALP Administration in office did it four times in seven years— Councillors interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: —and if we’d like to add up the total of those seven years—and, Councillor CUMMING, it’s a spurious comment to say LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK has seen 23% rate rise in his six years—well, we saw 42.65% in the seven years when we saw Lord Mayor Jim Soorley in this place. Councillors interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: But we have a proud history of keeping the rates as low as possible in this place, and still delivering on record achievements. Let’s start with some of Councillor CUMMING’s comments. He pulled out road resurfacing again in the speech today, and I couldn’t let it go because he did bring it up earlier in the week this week. And I have the wish list that was very clearly printed in Brisbane Times this week, and top three of what Councillor CUMMING wanted to see was increased reconstruction of suburban streets—increased reconstruction. Number three on the list. But guess what—when we delivered a record amount of funding for road resurfacing in this budget on Wednesday, what do we hear? ‘Oh, it’s no big deal, it’s just a core Council activity. No big deal.’ Councillors interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: Bipartisan support I heard for something— Chairman: Just a moment please, Councillor ADAMS. Councillor CUMMING and Councillor CASSIDY! Councillor CUMMING was afforded the capacity to deliver his response to the budget without interjection from the Administration. Please refrain from interjecting. Councillor ADAMS. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Don’t answer me back, Councillor CUMMING, it’s not appropriate. Councillor ADAMS.

Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, I agree, I have to say I agree with Councillor CUMMING. It is a core business of this Council, but I ask—how much did they spend when they were last in administration? We put $90 million this year into road reconstruction compared to their $50 million in their last year. Ratepayers faced multiple six per cent— Councillor interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: That is in today’s dollars, I will take that interjection, through you, Madam Chair. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor SUTTON! I have just given two of your colleagues a warning about interjecting. Have some respect in this place. Councillor ADAMS. Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair. Ratepayers faced six per cent rate increases, but got less road resurfacing. This year we will spend $1.08 billion on roads, a third of this budget. The last year of office of the Labor administration was $460 million. We are investing in our suburbs—39 major road projects starting or continuing in the suburbs, 250 minor road projects, including safety and congestion upgrades, and 650 roads to be resurfaced this financial year—650 roads, a record for any administration in this place. But again, it is a part of our multifaceted attack on traffic congestion that we have been committed to since 2008. We have spent $220 million on bikeways, with a further $26 million being spent this year. But what did you see from those opposite? Six per cent rate increases, less bikeways. Graffiti—we have spent, over the last six years, more than $3 million every year on making sure that this city is clean and green—just over $1 million in their last year of office in Administration. I’ll take some of the other comments from Councillor CUMMING. He mentioned footpaths. Footpaths was a big one. I’m not sure where the numbers came from in the book, but $18.6 million we’re providing on reconstruction, $11.9 million on new footpaths, as well as continuing the discretionary funds for Councillors if they want to deliver more footpaths on top of that $30 million-plus on footpaths. We used to get one a year—one a year. The Councillor for Tennyson got 19 this financial year. I’m looking forward to that debate when she comes back into this place. Public and active transport— 240 buses this term, 60 this year, rigid equivalent buses, and fully air-conditioned, kneeling buses and accessible for the people of Brisbane. Again, what did we hear from those opposite? ‘We wouldn’t be doing that.’ What would they be doing? They’d be doing the State Government’s Northern and Eastern Busway corridors. That’s where their money would be going— propping up their mates at the other end of the street. KSD (Kingsford Smith Drive)—they say KSD wouldn’t work, ‘we wouldn’t do it. It’s a disgrace we’re doing it’. We went to an election on KSD. Sitting in this room today is the result of that election where we asked the people— Councillors interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: —of Brisbane—this is our plan, and they backed it. Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS! Order! Councillor GRIFFITHS, you were out of the room when I just gave three of your colleagues a warning about interjecting. Councillor CUMMING was not interjected to by the Administration. You need to learn to show a bit of restraint.

Councillor ADAMS. Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair. They claimed it wouldn’t work and they would have torn up the contract. Well, that would have been an interesting $100 million down the drain to start with. But what was their plan to fix the congestion? Their plan again—oh, help out the State Government. Put it into their busways and put it into the open level crossings, a State Government controlled entity. QR (Queensland Rail)—bail out the trains. Goodness knows, they need it. Goodness knows QR needs the help, but to plough City Council money into the open level crossings, when we can deliver better outcomes for congestion-busting in this city. And bikeways— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Just a moment, please, Councillor ADAMS. The disrespect in this place is absolutely astounding. Councillor CASSIDY and Councillor SUTTON, I hereby caution you that if you continue to interject, you will be warned. Have a bit of courtesy. In this place during the handing down of the budget, the Opposition Leader’s reply and the Finance Chair’s response, generally there has been respect in the past. Your behaviour today is deplorable. Councillor ADAMS. Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do understand the frustration when you don’t like hearing the truth from the other side of the Chamber. Bikeways—we’re measuring them now in kilometres. Again, slightly spurious to be measuring kilometres, because ultimately what we are doing now is fixing up the stuff that was in the ‘too-hard basket’ for the previous administration. What we see is the major connectors now for those kilometres and kilometres of bikeways we have across bridges, across creeks, across intersections, and connectors that are the big ticket items, that are tricky but don’t necessarily give you kilometre on kilometre, but what they give you is a seamless connection over many kilometres to stay on your bike and actively travel through leisure, lifestyle, or to work. Madam Chair, this Administration sustainably manages their debt to deliver major infrastructure. We heard about the debt peaks from Councillor CUMMING, and I’m not quite sure where those numbers came from, because they do not reflect what I have seen in the book, the LORD MAYOR has seen in the book, and what is there before you today in a 279-page budget book. Our debt profile definitely peaks when we have major projects like Legacy Way and, of course, the Brisbane Metro as well. But what we will see over the next 10 years, is that our future borrowings will be reduced. On the published budget from last year to this year, we will see an 18% decrease on the per capita debt for people in Brisbane, at only $1,475 per person. In a great part, this is due to the savings we’ve made in the business case on $425 million less for Brisbane Metro, but it’s also an expanded system that we are now delivering for the people of Brisbane—bigger, better, cheaper. That is what we are delivering for the Brisbane Metro. The only bit of infrastructure we saw delivered from those opposite, their glamour project, was the Inner City Bypass, which cost $325 million, and the debt was much higher than that. Not to mention the peak of 1993-94 when debt was well over $2,000 per person—$2,625 per person. We will not see that in the next 10 years in this place. The rate rises, I mention again, we need to make sure that we are looking at these rate rises across the whole of the city—2.4% is the average rate rise that we see. There’s a lot of unders and overs, but you’ve also got to remember there’s a lot of different valuations across the city as well, so a rate rise for Inala, who’s coming off a much lower base, will be a much lower rate rise than what

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 82 you’ll probably see in Chelmer just a few suburbs up. Actually, the percentage increase in Chelmer is two per cent less than what you see in Inala, but their actual monetary value is double. So, trying to play class politics on the suburbs that may have gotten percentage increases does not reflect the true nature of how rates are valued on land valuations. What we did see this year was an average valuation of land increase of 8.7% for residential homeowners—8.7%. Now, that is great for investment in this city. That is great for homeowners that they have that investment in their property. But we need to make sure we temper that for our rate rises, and we do that. We use a three-year average rolling so that we can keep it down, and we also cap to 7.5%. No one is going above the seven per cent increase this year—nobody in the city is going above the seven per cent, and that is something to remember. You can’t just compare apples with oranges when it comes from the base rate that you are paying off. On top of that, we see the cherry picking of that percentages, again just drives the mistrust of the Council, when what we should be saying here is that we are working for all of the city. Again, I hear ‘bipartisan’ over there. We have kept rates considerably lower this year, and still are delivering on the infrastructure in this place. Of course, we went to the election with a very strong platform, too, of building our local economy, creating new and innovative jobs. Yet again I hear Councillor CUMMING slamming Brisbane Marketing; slamming Brisbane Marketing for the investment that they will be doing on behalf of the City of Brisbane to make sure that we can get the leisure tourism, the conventions, the major events and the investment into the City of Brisbane, to make sure that we are supporting our local economies. The LORD MAYOR outlined on Wednesday events like the Battle of Brisbane, Rugby League, the Regional Flavours, Mercedes Benz Fashion Festival and all of these events which attract people to Brisbane. This is complementing the State Government’s Tourism and Events Queensland with the growing visitation that we want to see in the south-east corner. But it’s important, even though it’s called Brisbane Marketing, Brisbane Marketing is not about advertising. It is much more than that. It’s about an investment attraction team which generated $731 million in economic benefit in the year 2015-16—$731 million in economic benefit. They brought significant projects like Asahi at Heathwood, Super Amart at Rochedale, Banyan Tree at Kangaroo Point, the Holiday Inn at Spring Hill, and Novotel at South Brisbane. This is delivering jobs for the people of Brisbane. This is delivering jobs for the people in the tourism industry. We have 64,700 people in Brisbane employed in the tourism industry, and what was Councillor CUMMING’s comments on this? ‘Oh, you’re just going to benefit the hospitality sector.’ Well, guess what— I agree. Yes, we are. We are going to support them in their jobs, and we’re going to try and expand that opportunity in Brisbane as well. We know Labor want lock-out of venues after midnight. They want to shut the city down, and they want to slow our economy as a New World City. But we are working to protect and grow those as well. I’d like to ask Councillor CUMMING—why don’t they support the workers in this city to expand? We want to increase our brand knowledge interstate and overseas, and our recent Brisbane Now campaign is absolutely spectacular when it comes to promoting the benefits of Brisbane, not just—and I can tell you, you’re not going to see a photo of a politician in anything Brisbane Marketing does interstate or overseas, it is about the beauty of our city, and the liveability and the lifestyle and leisure opportunities that you can see in Brisbane. Madam Chair, I will just touch briefly on the CBIC, which wasn’t mentioned today, but again it is part of making sure that we are keeping rates as low as possible in this place. They delivered a $20 million dividend just recently, which

means those opposite would rather have seen us slug the locals and putting a two per cent rate hike into Council. That would have forced ratepayers to cough up about $70 million over the last seven years if we didn’t have CBIC. But I have to say Councillor CUMMING doesn’t really know where he stands on the issues of rates or wages for Council officers. He was asked the other day about the 2.4% rate increase. He said it was too high, too high—2.4%, too high. So, when he was actually asked—would you commit to keeping rates at inflation, he said, ‘oh, it’s very hard to say when you’re not part of the internal system of Council, and at what costs rates are actually increasing’. Councillor CUMMING has been in this place for 23 years. He has a 279-page breakdown of Council’s spending before him, and he claims he doesn’t know what is going on. I do note, though, he believes that rates shouldn’t be going up higher than the wage index, so I’m wondering how it’s going to look to the Council workers he professes to be concerned about when he tells them that 2.5% on the EBA (Enterprise Bargaining Agreement) is too high, and they have to go back down to 1.8%, that it should be 1.8% or less. Seriously, flip-flop, flip-flop. Those opposite, Madam Chair, bar Councillor HOWARD, don’t like hearing this. They don’t like hearing this, and what we heard for 25 minutes from Councillor CUMMING is the same thing we hear week in, week out—very little on the budget. Why was there very little on the budget? Because this is a spectacular budget. There is nothing to attack on this budget, Madam Chair. We heard very little about this. This is an infrastructure budget, but provides a lifestyle and leisure for the people of Brisbane that we want to see. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank the Chief Financial Officer, Paul Oberle, and his team—Mark and Tanya, and the many others that did such hard work to make sure the process of putting the budget together and getting it delivered to you here on Wednesday, such a smooth process. I’d also like to thank my staff, Chris Kelly and Rosemarie White, for the process they’ve done in supporting me for the delivery of the budget in the last couple of months. I’m very proud to be standing here today behind LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK in saying—an infrastructure, lifestyle and leisure budget with the lowest possible rates absolutely delivering for the people of Brisbane. Chairman: LORD MAYOR.

ADJOURNMENT FOR PROGRAM INFORMATION SESSIONS: 646/2016-17 At that time, 9.46am, it was resolved on the motion of the LORD MAYOR, seconded by the DEPUTY MAYOR, that the meeting adjourn until 9am on Wednesday 21 June 2017.

Chairman: This meeting now stands adjourned until 9am on Wednesday 21 June 2017. The first program information sessions will commence at 11am today for Lifestyle and Community Services in the Council Chamber and Infrastructure for Brisbane in the Balmoral Room.

The schedule for the information sessions was as follows:

BUDGET INFORMATION SESSIONS – 2017-18

Program Venue Date and time (City Hall, Adelaide Street, Brisbane)

Infrastructure for Brisbane Balmoral Room, Level 1 Friday 16 June 2017 (including City Projects Office – 11am – 2pm business) Lifestyle and Community Services Council Chamber, Level 1 Friday 16 June 2017 11am – 2pm

Program Venue Date and time (City Hall, Adelaide Street, Brisbane)

Transport for Brisbane Balmoral Room, Level 1 Friday 16 June 2017 (including Transport for Brisbane – 2.30pm – 5.30pm business) City Governance Council Chamber, Level 1 Friday 16 June 2017 2.30pm – 5.30pm

Clean, Green and Sustainable City Balmoral Room, Level 1 Monday 19 June 2017 (including Field Services – businesses) 9am – 12pm

Future Brisbane Council Chamber, Level 1 Monday 19 June 2017 9am – 12pm

Economic Development Balmoral Room, Level 1 Monday 19 June 2017 12.30pm – 3.30pm

Customer Service Council Chamber, Level 1 Monday 19 June 2017 12.30pm – 3.30pm

UPON RESUMPTION:

THIRD DAY – Wednesday 21 June 2017 PRESENT:

RESUMPTION OF DEBATE ON THE 2017-18 BUDGET:

The Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN, declared the adjourned meeting open and continued as follows.

The Chairman then called on the Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK), to move the motion for the consideration of the Budgeted Financial Statements. 647/2016-17 The LORD MAYOR subsequently moved, seconded by the DEPUTY MAYOR:

That the Annual Plan and Budgeted Financial Statements, including the Budgeted Summary of Recommendations, the Budgeted Statement of Comprehensive Income (income and expenditure), the Budgeted Statement of Financial Position, the Budgeted Statement of Cash Flows, the Budgeted Summary of Recommendations – Long Term Financial Forecast and the Budgeted Statement of Financial Ratios as outlined on pages 7 to 13 and the Revenue Policy and Revenue Statement as outlined on pages 205 to 218 be noted for later debate and adoption.

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion was declared carried on the voices.

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 86 PROGRAM PRESENTATION

Next, the Chairman advised Councillors that the presentation of the various Programs and Business and Council Providers would be in accordance with Chapter 6, Section 74 of the Meetings Local Law 2001. She also pointed out that she had approved the Chief Executive Officer’s request for Divisional Managers and other relevant officers to be in the Chamber while the Program or Business Unit for which their particular Unit of Administration was responsible, was being debated.

The Chairman then called upon the DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER to present the Transport for Brisbane Program.

1. TRANSPORT FOR BRISBANE PROGRAM: 648/2016-17 The DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, Chairman of the Public and Active Transport Committee moved, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES, that for the services of the Council, the allocations for the Operations and the Projects for the year 2017-18 and the Rolling Projects for the Transport for Brisbane Program as contained on pages 14 to 23 and the indicative schedules on pages 150 to 152 so far as they relate to Program 1, be adopted.

Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman. It gives me great pleasure to rise to talk on the Transport for Brisbane Program, program number 1. This is obviously a new and, I guess, reconstituted program, and the fact that it is number 1 in the budget reflects that public and active transport is a critical focus for this Administration. It is a key part, not only of the agenda that we went to the election with last year, but it is critical in ensuring that we can, as a city, deal with traffic congestion and the liveability of our city going forward. If we don’t get this program right, then the liveability of our city will suffer, the ability to get around our city will suffer, and this, as I said, is going to be critical going forward. That’s why this Council, unlike almost every other council in Australia, is absolutely, 100% focused on public transport and active transport. We don’t play in little puddles like other councils do when it comes to the program. We invest in projects and programs and operations on the scale that a state government would in other parts of Australia. We provide, for example, a public transport subsidy of $123.9 million over the coming financial year. That’s $123.9 million more than virtually any other council puts into public transport. Now, there are some councils that put into things like bus stops, and that is obviously important, and that is good, but no other council in Australia invests and is focused on public transport like this one. When it comes to active transport, no other council, and indeed state government, is investing to the extent that we are in the transport network, both for active travel and public transport. This Administration has a clear record of putting its money where its mouth is. Whether it’s buying new buses, renewing the bus fleet, ensuring that it is accessible, and ensuring that it is modern. Whether it is ensuring that our CityCat fleet continues to grow, and continues to provide top-notch services to the people of Brisbane. Whether it is upgrading CityCat terminals and bus stops across the city so that people can easily and safely access our public transport. Whether it is investing in bikeways, shared paths, bike lanes across city, or whether it is responding to the review into bus driver safety and ensuring that our bus drivers and our bus passengers are safer as they travel around the network, this Administration is not just talking about it—we are funding it. That is the critical point of this program. This program not just continues where we are at the moment, this program funds a massive step change forward when it comes to public transport in Brisbane. I

specifically refer to initiatives like the Brisbane Metro. Now, Brisbane Metro was only announced as a project early last year— Councillor interjecting. DEPUTY MAYOR: —early last year, and unlike other fanciful projects such as light rail through the middle of the CBD— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! DEPUTY MAYOR: —fanciful and ridiculous projects— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! DEPUTY MAYOR: —discredited projects— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Order! Do not start the budget session off by being disorderly. DEPUTY MAYOR. DEPUTY MAYOR: As I was saying, unlike other fanciful ideas that have been put forward—ideas that have been put forward in the past and have failed to get off the ground time and time again, ideas which show a lack of imagination and a lack of understanding of the transport challenges of this city, and ideas that simply duplicate the CityGlider route—this project is now moving forward with a $50 million investment of funding. This is a real, live project, and it is going to happen. We are putting the money into it. We are taking it to the next level. This project is not something that we’re just simply talking about. This is a project that is being funded, and not just this year, but if you look through the forwards, this Council has done exactly what it said it would do with Brisbane Metro, and that is fund the majority of the project and make sure that it will happen. The LORD MAYOR has committed to putting in two-thirds of the cost of the project, and it’s interesting, because I’m not sure what Labor will say about this funding mechanism, but I do remember that their fanciful light rail project had a contribution from Council of 10%—10%. So, we’re talking about a project in excess of $1 billion, and we know that tram projects invariably blow out massively because they involve ripping up the existing road reserve and relocating all types of services. They involve property resumptions. They involve road closures. They involve lane closures. They involve overhead wires and all types of other challenges. These projects invariably blow out. So, $1 billion is being very conservative in terms of—is being very, I guess, understated in terms of the light rail project. We know it would be more than that, and they offered to contribute just 10% of the costs of this project. So, I don’t know where the rest of the money would come from, but 10% doesn’t make a project. So there is no light rail project for Brisbane. Labor’s plan was simply a con. Labor’s plan was simply nothing more than a Photoshop picture of a tram going the wrong way up the street, in the Valley, but nothing else behind it. Whereas Metro is happening, and it is funded at least in two-thirds majority by Council going forward, and I am looking forward to seeing other levels of government come to the table. We know that there is a willingness at other levels of government to support good projects like this, projects that have a business case, projects that have a BCR (Benefit-Cost Ratio) of almost 2. Projects like Gold Coast Light Rail that had a similar BCR of 1.9, that got both State and Federal support, and indeed Federal funding. That’s where I would like to see Metro heading, and that’s what our focus will be going forward.

So, having released the business case recently, and now getting into the new financial year and progressing the additional work that needs to be done to develop a construction management plan and to do more work associated with the design of the project and prepare a reference design, we’re going to be getting on with it. We appreciate the support of Deputy Premier Jackie Trad, we appreciate the support of the State Government, and we appreciate the support of the Federal Government as well. Both levels of government have made positive comments, have been positive that we are working together in a cooperative manner, and as I have said in this place, the only people who are now against this project are the people sitting opposite—the rabble—the five Councillors sitting opposite who simply can’t bring themselves to support this project because it wasn’t their idea, because they love opposition for opposition’s sake, and because they’d rather con people with a fanciful light rail project instead. Well, let me tell you, Councillor CUMMING, you won’t be able to deliver a light rail project for Brisbane, and if you go into the next election promising such, people will see the same thing they saw last time, which is it is not a legitimate or real project, whereas Brisbane Metro will be under way by then. Construction will be under way, and we’ll be getting on with the job. The other thing that this budget does, and this program does going forward, is we’re investing in the capacity of our existing bus and ferry fleet, and also our major infrastructure such as terminals and bus stops. This year, for the first time in a long time, we’re purchasing new articulated buses, and these are buses that are part of our existing bus build contract with Volgren, so we’ve obviously made it very clear that we’ll be purchasing 60 rigid equivalents a year, so this is part of that mix that we have committed to. But, instead of buying 60 standard buses, we will also be investing in articulated buses as well. So there’ll be a mixture of standard and articulated buses, and we’ll be deploying those new articulated buses onto the busiest routes across the city, the routes where we know people are having full standing loads, where there’s really strong demand, and we need extra capacity to service the demand. So those routes will be serviced by the new articulated buses. These buses can carry up to 116 passengers, whereas a standard bus can carry around 60 passengers. So we’re talking about almost double the size in terms of passenger carrying capacity, and obviously this is a good thing for the fleet going forward. Now, the last time Council purchased articulated buses, they were compressed natural gas buses, and those buses are generally located at the Garden City Depot. The feedback that we’ve had from the drivers on those buses is that the type of fuel that they’re using, the compressed natural gas, is not ideal for such a large vehicle, so these buses—well, they do the job in a reasonable manner, but don’t have the ideal power train and power source or fuel source to carry such large numbers of people. So they have quite slow acceleration, they’re a bit clunky. These new buses will be the latest European diesel technology, so Euro 6 standard, which has massive improvements in efficiency, massive reductions in emissions, and a whole range of other benefits which includes the latest technology coming out of Europe. So we’ll be taking advantage of those Euro 6 drive trains. They will be sent out to Australia. The first articulated bus will be built in Melbourne, and that will be simply the first, I guess, test bus, and then the remaining buses will be built up here in Brisbane at Eagle Farm at our bus build factory, which is a joint venture with Volgren. These buses, not only will they be able to carry a larger number of passengers quickly and efficiently; they will also have USB charging points in them for passengers to use, as will every single one of our new buses going forward. This, in the scheme of things, might be a relatively minor improvement, but it is one that is greatly appreciated by the passengers who use our buses every day, and in particular, young people.

There’s been a massive amount of positive feedback on this initiative. As I said, a small thing but an important thing to ensure that people know that we care about the passenger experience, we care about ensuring that, particularly young people, if they’re catching a bus home at night, and they need to call their parents or friends to pick them up from the bus stop, that they won’t be stuck at that bus stop at night without any charge in their phone. So practical things like that do make a difference. It’s not just a nice-to-have, there’s also a safety element as well associated with this improvement. So I’ll be pleased to see that continue to roll out. We have around 14 or 15 buses that currently have USB charging facilities in them, and by the end of the coming financial year, this will be around 69 or 70 buses in total. So we’ll continue to roll it out going forward to ensure that more and more buses have this opportunity for USB charging. We’ll be getting on with a new project which hasn’t previously been announced, Councillor HOWARD, and that is the upgrade of the New Farm Park CityCat Terminal. Now, this is a very exciting project, not just for Councillor HOWARD, but also for the city. New Farm Park is an incredibly popular destination for our city, for people from all around Brisbane, and there’s also the Powerhouse there, as well and a number of other attractions. We need to make sure that that terminal is up to the modern standards, not only for disability access, but also in terms of flood resilience as well. We’ll be getting on with the job of delivering a new ferry terminal for New Farm Park, and we look forward to rolling that out over the coming 12 months. That’s obviously one of a number of terminals that we’re working on going forward. We have around nine terminals to upgrade between now and 2022, and that’s of the existing terminal fleet to ensure that we meet relevant disability access requirements by the end of 2022. This is something not just for people with a disability, although that is absolutely critical. It is also a practical improvement for a larger number of members of the community. They might be people with a mobility issue, or people that have difficulty walking up stairs or steep slopes. It may be parents with prams. These type of improvements will benefit a wide range of people. We are investing in those improvements. There are still large numbers of train stations across the network, for example, that don’t have appropriate disability access. We’re getting on with the job of making sure our facilities are up to standard. Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR, your time has expired. Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Thanks very much, Madam Chair. I rise to enter the debate on Program 1 – Transport for Brisbane. I have to start by commending the Leader of the Opposition on his budget reply speech last week. It certainly made the LNP sit up and listen, Madam Chair, because for the first half hour of the info sessions for Transport for Brisbane, all they could talk about was Councillor CUMMING, Madam Chair. So that’s great to see. They asked questions about bus fleet numbers and active transport targets and bus service cuts in our suburbs, and they sounded pretty worried, and they should be, Madam Chair—they should be very worried. The LNP’s spin machine in this place has been in overdrive lately, Madam Chair. It’s like the old-fashioned front loader on full pelt—it’s jumping all over the place, and what you get out doesn’t look like anything to do with what you put in in the first place, Madam Chair. But the facts speak for themselves in this program. Bus numbers are down under this LORD MAYOR, Madam Chair. That is a fact. No amount of political spin from the LORD MAYOR or the DEPUTY MAYOR can change that. Councillor SCHRINNER’s explanation went like this—‘peak demand is lower today than it was in 2012. Less people want to catch buses, so we’ll have less buses on the road for them to catch’, and that’s his explanation. He says it as if it’s somebody else’s problem, Madam Chair.

On their watch, Madam Chair, roads all across the city are grinding to a halt. Buses were running so late that people weren’t sure if their bus was actually running incredibly late, or the service that was turning up was early. They weren’t sure, Madam Chair, so the solution that the LNP came up with, Madam Chair, was to just change the timetables and not do anything about improving infrastructure for services. So Councillor SCHRINNER says there’s absolutely nothing to see there. No such thing as service cuts in the new timetables. That’s simply not true. Buses had absolutely no chance of making their timetables, so they changed the timetables instead of addressing the root cause, Madam Chair, which is a lack of investment in transport infrastructure. So a timetable that previously, for instance, had five services in peak hour on the timetable, but only ever saw four of them turning up because of congestion on Brisbane’s roads, will now just show the four that were turning up, and does nothing about infrastructure whatsoever. The LNP have the gall to stand up in this place and say there’s been no changes to services here, Madam Chair. The travelling public have seen now for years and years the changes that have been happening on bus services in Brisbane through the LNP’s inaction, Madam Chair. Now, every time Labor Councillors get up and suggest practical solutions to ease bus congestion throughout our city, we hear, whether it’s Councillor SCHRINNER or Councillor ADAMS, bellow that those solutions are somebody else’s problem to fix, Madam Chair. They’re happy to spend $1 billion on a State Government busway, Madam Chair, but as soon as we suggest an investment of around $100 million on the Northern and Eastern Transitways, they say, ‘no, no, no, that’s not our problem, the State Government can do that one. That’s their roads. They can do that’. Madam Chair. But those words and actions just smack of political spin and nothing else. Now, it’s great to see the fare relief package from the State Government, and we’re sure this will have a very positive impact on public transport patronage, but the grim reality is people living in the outer northern or eastern suburbs, for instance, will not jump on a bus when it is quicker and more reliable to drive into the city, Madam Chair, so passenger demand will stay depressed under this LNP Administration until some serious investment is made in new public transport corridors. The Metro will not solve that, Madam Chair. Just a year ago the LORD MAYOR stood in this place, on 15 June, and said this —‘In relation to the Brisbane Metro, please let me give you some basic information and dispel a few myths that were spoken by the ALP in March. The Brisbane Metro is not a bus. It runs on tracks— Councillor interjecting. Councillor CASSIDY: —just like the Paris Metro’. Councillor interjecting. Councillor CASSIDY: Just a couple of months later, on 2 August, the DEPUTY MAYOR dutifully backed up the LORD MAYOR and proclaimed the following—‘So, essentially a project can be a metro if it is a high frequency and high capacity rail— Councillor interjecting. Councillor CASSIDY: —whether that is light rail or heavy rail’. Councillor interjecting. Councillor CASSIDY: Then he backed it up on 25 October last year in the Chamber, Madam Chair, and he said, ‘Well, it is a metro, just like the London Underground is a metro, and the Tokyo Metro is a metro. Guess what, metro is usually light rail’. Councillor interjecting. Councillor CASSIDY: ‘Metro is light rail’, he said. So, Madam Chair, we were right not to trust the LORD MAYOR before the last election when he said he would deliver his underground metro come hell or high water, Madam Chair. We were right to

call him out in the months that followed on his flawed project, and we have now seen this eventuate into a banana bus plan, Madam Chair. Labor Councillors are on the record supporting the conversion of the Victoria Bridge into a public and active transport bridge. We know the bottleneck between the portal at the South East Busway and King George Square busway station must be addressed, but the business case for the Metro, just again, asks us and the people of Brisbane to trust the LNP they’ve found the best solution, Madam Chair. It’s silent on the finer details of the options for the new Cultural Centre bus station. It doesn’t tell us why a busway station with 100-metre long stations, which are about 50 metres short of the King George Square station, will be sufficient for the future. It doesn’t tell us why an above-ground station relocated wouldn’t have worked. It’s an old-fashioned ‘just trust us’ document, Madam Chair. Well, any trust the people of Brisbane had in the LNP is well and truly burned out now when it comes to this Metro bus project. So we should all be asking a lot of questions, Madam Chair. On funding, the DEPUTY MAYOR thinks it’s all very simple. He said in the Information Session that $300 million to the Federal Government is small change. It’s the sort of small change you just find in the centre console of your car, Madam Chair. That may be the case for Malcolm Turnbull in his Rolls Royce, Madam Chair, personally, but it’s now how public transport projects are funded in this country. He cited the highly successful Gold Coast Light Rail project, Madam Chair, a project that is a genuinely collaborative approach between three levels of government and the private sector, and that’s exactly what it is, Madam Chair— genuinely collaborative approach. It’s a partnership. But the difference here is the LNP came up with their solution on the run, before sitting down with either the private sector or other levels of government to identify the very first problem to address, Madam Chair. Three hundred million is not loose change, and we should be very worried about how public policy is being carried out in this place if the DEPUTY MAYOR thinks that it is. Now, this lacklustre approach to public policy in this place from the DEPUTY MAYOR is spilling over into active transport. We’re seeing an Administration that is caring less and less about the views of cyclists every day in this place, Madam Chair, and the DEPUTY MAYOR’s disdain for cycling groups grows, and outcomes are getting worse. It’s a very bad recipe for cycling infrastructure in Brisbane, Madam Chair. Labor Councillors are not afraid to talk to cycling groups. I’m not ashamed, DEPUTY MAYOR, to sit down and discuss the pros and cons of projects with them, but the DEPUTY MAYOR doesn’t like this, Madam Chair. He raises this in an accusatory sort of way and says that we should be ashamed of talking to Bicycle User Groups (BUGs). I suppose he thinks his best defence is offence when it comes to this, Madam Chair, but that doesn’t lead to better outcomes ever. Rod Harding and Labor took a fully costed $139 million bikeways plan for Brisbane to the last election, and the centrepiece of that, Madam Chair, was forming a Lord Mayor’s Bicycle User Group to directly inform the LORD MAYOR on the best ways to address the missing links, safety concerns, and where to best invest ratepayers’ hard-earned money in cycling infrastructure. We will not shout down at cyclists like the DEPUTY MAYOR does. We will always consult with them, Madam Chair. Now, on to CityCycle, something the DEPUTY MAYOR didn’t talk about, because it’s a pretty sad story for the LNP, Madam Chair. Does everyone here remember how excited the LNP was back in 2010— Councillor interjecting. Councillor CASSIDY: —and those media articles that said that, over the life of the 20-year contract, CityCycle would deliver a $9 million profit. Councillor interjecting.

Councillor CASSIDY: Now, I wonder if the LNP will get up and stand by that figure today, Madam Chair, considering that scheme has already cost us well in excess of $10 million, after you take the yearly revenue figures out, Madam Chair. Once again this year, it will run at a loss. Once again, Madam Chair, just like it did last year. Now, the ratepayers of Brisbane will invest in another $3.3 million this year on CityCycle alone, when they can’t even get green paint on Roghan Road at Taigum for bike lanes, Madam Chair. They can’t get bikeway lighting projects complete out at Coorparoo. It’s a time when Brisbane’s first ever on-road dedicated cycling lanes on Shaw Road are about to be ripped up, Madam Chair. CityCycle has been a financial disaster for Brisbane, while at the same time it’s been a massive windfall for a French advertising company. Talk about strange priorities, Madam Chair. Now, moving on to bus safety, Madam Chair, we support the implementation of the recommendations of the bus safety review. We have been on record as condemning any act of violence against bus drivers or their passengers, Madam Chair. We’ve been steadfast in our support for Brisbane’s bus drivers, and we’ve also been steadfast in our calls for more security on our buses. We moved a motion in this place, Madam Chair, only to have it voted down by the LNP. We moved a motion in the Public and Active Transport Committee asking the DEPUTY MAYOR to allow bus drivers to address that Committee, address the decision making politicians, Madam Chair, and he voted that down as well. We know from talking to bus drivers that security is a major concern on a variety of routes, Madam Chair. When under questioning, we asked how much investment was being made in security this financial year, the figure came out at $668,300— Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY, your time has expired. Further debate? Councillor ALLAN. Councillor ALLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I’m pleased to rise today to speak on this program, Transport for Brisbane. I would like to thank the LORD MAYOR and DEPUTY MAYOR for their enthusiasm and determination in continuing to deliver Australia’s most modern public and active transport and progressing the Brisbane Metro project. This Administration is focused on developing and maintaining Brisbane as a liveable and easy city to get around, and is prepared to step in and carry some of the burden where the State Government has skirted their responsibilities. This is evidenced through the Council’s subsidies to support public transport which exceeds $120 million per annum, and a very significant majority commitment to the Brisbane Metro project over coming years. In developing our transport network, effective alternate transport options provide lifestyle choices for the community, with opportunities to reduce congestion, and deliver economic, social and environmental benefits. This Administration aims to achieve the provision of these alternative travel options through investment in public and active transport, and adopting and encouraging innovation and the use of new technology, such as driverless cars, car sharing, et cetera. A balanced approach has been adopted that provides residents with choice. You can drive a car, you can ride a bike, catch a ferry or take a walk along our riverside walkways. It’s about building our capacity around all of these options for the benefit of the community. It is about delivery and having the courage to pursue ambitious plans and be adaptable. Something that the other side of the Chamber would rather criticise, rather than provide sensible alternatives. It’s about delivering, not dreaming, Councillor CASSIDY.

Touching upon active transport, Brisbane provides an extensive network of safe, convenient and connected pathways and bikeways, to enable residents and visitors to easily move around the city. Over $26 million will be committed in the coming year to construct key bikeway links, continuing this Administration’s commitment to bikeway infrastructure. As one of the city’s premier bikeways, the Kedron Brook Bikeway traverses the Northgate Ward. I am pleased to see this Administration’s continued investment in the bikeway network to the benefit of commuter and recreational users. This also helps to reduce traffic congestion and contributes to a healthier, sustainable and more accessible city. Touching upon Active School Travel, the ongoing and increased commitment to the Active School Travel program, which encourages children and their parents or carers to walk, ride, scooter or take public transport to school is welcomed, and indeed, with a number of schools in the Northgate Ward participating in the program, and a number of schools earmarked to join. This is a positive program that encourages a more healthy lifestyle, while reducing congestion and improved safety around our schools. Madam Chairman, I would now like to briefly touch upon public transport. While the Northgate Ward benefits from having a train line running through it and, for a small section we actually have two lines, timetable and planning failures by the State Government and Queensland Rail have placed more emphasis on our bus services. As the ‘rail fail’ shamble is likely to continue for at least another year, bus services and alternate transport options will continue to be critical to residents of the Northgate Ward. Accordingly, I am pleased to see that this Administration continues to support and deliver high-quality public transport services through the provision of a modern bus fleet, the most modern in Australia. The commitment to purchase another 60 new air-conditioned and accessible buses, a number of which will be high capacity buses, to meet network demand and DDA (Disability Discrimination Act 1992) requirements, is welcomed. Of course, I cannot touch upon public transport without mentioning the Brisbane Metro. While in Phase 1 the Metro does not touch Northgate Ward, we will nonetheless be beneficiaries of the extra capacity in the network. This will create significantly better services in the suburbs, and we will be able to link with the Royal Brisbane Women’s Hospital terminus from both the Toombul and Chermside Interchanges. From a Northgate Ward perspective, this budget will support and continue the gains we have made in 2016-17. The past year has been a year of significant delivery for the residents of Northgate Ward, something that they have found refreshing after years of inaction by the previous ALP Councillor. We will continue to support our commuter and recreational cyclists with the rehabilitation of a section of the Jim Soorley Bikeway that has been impacted by erosion. There will also be enhancements to some of the shared pathways on Shaw Road near Kedron Brook. There will be a number of footpath upgrades, some of which will support our Active School Travel aspirations. Specifically, the footpath upgrades at Ferguson Road, Wavell Heights, and Red Hill Road, Banyo, are close to local schools. Council will continue to operate a high-quality bus service, with the Toombul Bus Interchange and the Chermside Bus Interchange being key points in the bus network which are actively used by Northgate residents. Through these points, Council are able to provide commuters with services that allow them ready access to the CBD and other suburban destinations. The Active School Travel program will continue to provide benefits to schools such as St Pius’ at Banyo, St Joseph’s at Nundah, and Nundah State School. In particular, it has been insightful to work with Council officers and the committed leadership team at St Pius’ to establish their Active School Travel program from inception, and to witness how it has developed and how engaged and enthusiastic the students are.

In conclusion, this is a budget that builds upon this Administration’s work in previous years, and continues to deliver on our campaign commitment to deliver Australia’s most modern public transport fleet, tackle congestion and create new lifestyle and leisure opportunities. This is a program that the City of Brisbane and its residents need. I would like to acknowledge Council officers for the significant effort they have given in delivering this program. Madam Chairman, I commend this program to the Chamber. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING: Yes, thanks, Madam Chair. The Metro, Madam Chairman, it’s—oh, look, the other thing, I’d like to compliment my colleagues for mainly having some maroon clothing. Councillor SRI, there’s a lot of blues over there, but anyhow, at least some people know how to dress on State of Origin day. Chairman: To the program, please, Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING: At least some people know how to dress, Madam Chairman. Councillors interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: Madam Chair, my concern with the Metro is it will be of limited benefit to Council’s bus network. I think it will mainly benefit buses using the South East Busway. It won’t benefit BUZ (Bus Upgrade Zone) routes that do not feed in the busway, Madam Chairman. So, my worry is it will only attract a limited number of extra patrons to the buses in Brisbane, but I hope I’m wrong. I hope I’m wrong, Madam Chairman. The Council subsidy is set out in the budget at page 14—$123.9 million, up 1.64% from last year’s $121.9 million. Councillor interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: Well, it’s less than the rates rise and it’s less than the inflation rate, but I’d like to see a detailed explanation of this figure. Perhaps it’s a topic for a Committee briefing in the next session of Council. The other thing about—and it was in the LORD MAYOR’s speech, and Councillor SCHRINNER dealt with it today—there seems to be some resentment from the Administration that they actually have to spend this amount of money. You know, it’s like they shouldn’t have to do it. They shouldn’t have to do it. Well, what a ridiculous approach to take, Madam Chairman. There’s been decades of bipartisan support in the Brisbane City Council for— Councillors interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: —decades of bipartisan support in the Brisbane City Council for expenditure on public transport— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor CUMMING: —for subsidising public— Chairman: Councillor CUMMING, please continue. Councillor CUMMING: Madam Chair, are you going to say anything to—no, sorry. Chairman: Don’t push your luck, Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING: It wasn’t me—it wasn’t me. Chairman: To the budget. You’re wasting your time. Councillor CUMMING: I’m suffering loud and noisy interjections. I am flat out hearing myself, Madam Chairman. Councillor interjecting.

Chairman: Councillor—order! Councillor CUMMING: I’m flat out hearing myself. Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS! Councillor CASSIDY! Councillor CUMMING, I will just remind you under section 74(2)(f) there are no extensions today, so make the most of your time. Councillor CUMMING: That’s right, yes. Councillor SIMMONDS, he should be moved to another part of the Chamber, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Order! Councillor CUMMING: Madam Chairman, so yes, I think they just need to get over this sort of resentment that they bear towards expenditure on public transport, because, you know, as I said, it’s a long-standing thing that’s supported across the Chamber, and they need to get on with it. The other thing they need to announce is, if there’s no money coming for the Metro from any other level of government. I don’t think the State is going to be able to afford to contribute anything. I’m not sure about the Federal Government. If there’s no money, is the Brisbane City Council prepared to pay 100% of the Metro project? You need to make a decision on that, otherwise you’re going to be spending millions, and it will be hundreds of millions, and you’ll get there and say, ‘oh, a third to go now, oh, sorry, we haven’t budgeted for that. We’ll have to stop two-thirds of the way through the project’. Councillors interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: They need to— Chairman: Order! Councillor CUMMING: They need to announce it now, whether they’re prepared—enough of this trying to con people—announce whether, if necessary, they’re prepared to pay 100% of the project. That’s what they need to do, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I turn now to new buses. Now, new buses, every time there’s a budget, they come out and they say, ‘oh, you know, 60 new buses’, and of course, the question we ask, and the question they never say in their speeches or anything is ‘how many buses are being retired?’ We understand from the Information Session there’s 50 being retired, so the net increase in buses is 10— is 10. Now, I would have thought it would be more honest and open if the LORD MAYOR’s speech, and Councillor SCHRINNER’s speech if they’d said yes, there will be a net increase of 10 buses this year. The other thing I’m concerned about is whether we’re going to have enough buses, Madam Chairman. As we know, the State Labor Government, through TransLink, have slashed bus fares, Madam Chairman. The reduction in the zone 4 is merged in with zone 3, and the cut in fares is some 25%, Madam Chairman. That’s a terrific reduction in—the minimum reduction in zone 1 is 4.47%, but 25% for people in zone 4, that’s a tremendous reduction. I believe there’s likely to be increased patronage of the buses in the short term. But my concern is whether there’ll be enough buses to—as Councillor CASSIDY said, the number of buses we’ve got now is less than what it was about, how long, five years ago? Councillor interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: Five years ago, so we’ve actually—so that’s my concern. Madam Chairman, I’m also concerned about patrons having to stand in buses, Madam Chairman. I actually catch public transport on a regular basis. I catch the mighty train service from Wynnum, and one of the great benefits is you're able to sit and you’re able to read, you’re able to do work on your laptop, Madam Chair. It’s one of the great benefits.

I’m just concerned about these new buses that they’re purchasing, the 10 buses, how many seats will there be in those, Councillor SCHRINNER? Will it be—I understand about 50% of people will have to stand in those buses. Of course, that’s a problem with the Metro, too, Madam Chairman. If people are going to be expected to stand for 45 minutes from— Councillors interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: —45 minutes from Eight Mile Plains, Madam Chairman, to— Chairman: Order! Councillor CUMMING: —get to work every day, 45 minutes standing from Eight Mile Plains, because the Metro’s got about 25% or less seating, then—I’ve got to tell you, a lot of the punters won’t take that option, Madam Chairman. They won’t take that option. They won’t take that option, so I’m just raising that, being a constructive suggestion, I notice from the interjection opposite there. They’re not interested in constructive suggestions, they’re not interested in practical things. They’re off with the pixies; they’re off with the pixies as usual, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I turn now to bikeways, Madam Chairman. Look, the Brisbane City Council specialises in building the most expensive bikeways on earth. You know, they’re experts on it, Madam Chairman. They blew $120 million in the 2012-16 term, and they only got 8.1 kilometres of bikeways. Now, I’m interested to know what they predict they’ll get, what distance of bikeways they’ll get with the $100 million in this budget, Madam Chairman. If the costings are the same, Madam Chair, I’ve done the costings, it will be 6.75 kilometres. It will be 6.75 kilometres. That’s all they’ll manage. We’ll see if they can do any better. I’d like a prediction upfront, you know, so they don’t let people down. All these cycling groups out here think there’re going to be a lot more bikeways, and they’ll actually have a few leery, you know, world-class bikeways that cost— you know, plated with gold that cost a fortune and covering hardly any distance at all. I’m very interested to know what that figure is expected to be. Madam Chairman, CityCycle—good old CityCycle. Well, CityCycle is what happens when you give a cycling contract to an advertising company, Madam Chairman. They’re experts on advertising. They’ll get out there and maximise their revenue, Madam Chairman. They’re not particularly interested in maximising the use of the bikes, but they’re interested in maximising their revenue, because that’s what they’re experts in. That’s what they make their profit out of, Madam Chairman. I know the Administration are desperate. They’ve been offering Labor Councillors, and their staff, have been offered free memberships and everything like that, Madam Chairman. They’re just desperate to get people to use the cycles, but when is it going to break even? When is it going to break even? I don’t think it will break even before the end of the 20-year term of the contract. I think we’ll be putting money into it year in, year out for 20 years, and after 20 years, hopefully we’ll be able to come up with something a lot better, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, also, it’s very—a little bit interested, I am, with page 15 of the budget document, when it says in reference to CityCycle, ‘Recent years have seen double-digit growth in ridership for the scheme’. Now, Madam Chairman —but there’s no prediction for what’s going to happen next year. I would have thought they might be a bit more confident than that. Perhaps the LORD MAYOR is prepared to make a prediction, Madam Chairman, or perhaps he’s not prepared, given past experience, Madam Chairman. I turn next to footpaths, Madam Chairman, and a couple of things there. There’s footpaths reconstruction, there’s some $6.565 million allocated towards that, Madam Chairman. Now, you know, I’d hate to get parochial, Madam Chairman, but I divide that by 26 and I say, well, that’s an average of $252,500 per ward, Madam Chairman. So I urge Councillors to go through and check how much is being spent in your ward, Madam Chairman, because I know, poor old

Wynnum Manly’s got ripped off on this one. We’ve got $39,000 on one footpath in Stratton Terrace, Wynnum, which is a million miles short of the average of $252,500, Madam Chairman. So I urge Councillors on both sides of the Chamber, Councillor SRI, all’s well, just to check how you did, Madam Chairman. But I’ve got some concerns about footpaths in Brisbane. It’s a matter that I’ve come across a couple of years ago. The Brisbane City Council has very weak requirements for developers to put footpaths in Brisbane, Madam Chairman, very weak. They only have to be put on neighbourhood access roads. So with a typical new estate, Madam Chairman, with a typical new estate around Brisbane, there’s no footpaths except if they front a neighbourhood access road, Madam Chairman. So most of the new estates around Brisbane—I can show you them, throughout Wynnum West, they’ve been going in like that for years— there’s no concrete footpaths. So we’ve got a real legacy from the start, when you could get the developers, instead of having— Councillor interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: —pathetically weak development standards— Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS! Councillor CUMMING: —you know, Madam Chairman, as though we’re some sort of, you know, like battling council that is really desperate to get development occurring, Madam Chairman. It’s quite wrong, Madam Chairman, and I’ve got a lot of New Zealanders in mine, and in New Zealand the developers are required to put concrete footpaths around all the new estates, and they come out here and they say, ‘oh, what a pathetic effort we make in Brisbane’, Madam Chairman, and I can understand their concerns, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Councillor CUMMING, your time has expired. Further debate? Councillor WYNDHAM. Councillor WYNDHAM: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on public transport, but just before that, to the colourful Councillor CUMMING, I’ve got a little bit of maroon here, over black, because it could be a dark day for the Blues behind. Chairman: To the budget, please, Councillor WYNDHAM. Councillor WYNDHAM: But, Madam Chair, while I’m speaking of Councillor CUMMING and Councillor CASSIDY, too, I think they go a little bit into history, but they’re blinded by the history that they’re trying to introduce. Madam Chair, I can remember in this Chamber many years ago the wonderful Councillor, Councillor Victoria Newton, who used to look after that sort of Sandgate area, went to Sydney to order buses, as the Chair of Transport. Well, the report wasn’t good, because the buses didn’t have a back door for people to exit from. So we didn’t purchase those buses. But she was a very good and lovely Councillor. She helped the people of her electorate instead of playing politics. Madam Chair—and we talk about the numbers of buses. Yes, we’re purchasing 60 buses, and they might be replacing some that are being retired. However, if you look at the statistics, the last five years of the ALP Administration, they ordered 60 buses, but they weren’t 60 buses in total like we’re ordering 60 buses this time, their 60 buses were the total order for five years, and they still had their retirements. Madam Chair, Councillor CASSIDY carries on about Metro. What I would like to say here today is, when you look at their policy of trams, they’re sticking with it. They still want trams down Ann Street and streets like that, in amongst the cars. Madam Chair, all the public said in the last election about trams was ‘two to the Valley’, because that was basically the best way of putting it. The thing is, with Metro, yes, there have been changes, but flexibility is what it’s all about. You don’t set your mind on something and don’t waver from it

when something better can be worked through, and the business case shows that. So, Madam Chair, I’d suggest that they get on board instead of worrying about the ‘two to the Valley’, and get behind this program, because it will help alleviate many of the transport problems. It will alleviate the problems in the suburbs, too, by allowing more buses, et cetera, in the networks in the suburbs. As far as travel times go, I was always under the opinion—and I thought I had it on pretty good authority from bus drivers, et cetera—that the times for travel of buses is set by the State Government, not by Council. I could be clarified on that, but I believe it’s— Councillor interjecting. Councillor WYNDHAM: It’s a contract, exactly. So, Madam Chair, they need to look at those sort of things, too, without blaming Council for those sort of travel times. Madam Chair, working on the cycle network, they talk about distances and that, but if you look at the links that are happening at the moment—and as I said the other day, you can now ride 100-plus kilometre quite safely off-road because of the new linkages that are happening. That’s not just one cycleway, that’s many cycleways across the city, and of course, I’m assuming that Councillor CASSIDY, because of his love of cycling, he will be joining me soon. I went past there yesterday morning, no sign of him once again. I keep looking every time I go past his office. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor interjecting. Councillor WYNDHAM: Well, I would have thought— Chairman: Councillor SUTTON! Councillor WYNDHAM: I would have thought he would have had his bike chained up at least outside the office waiting, but it doesn’t happen. Councillor interjecting. Councillor WYNDHAM: We talk about CityCycle. Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY! Councillor WYNDHAM: We talk about CityCycle. Councillor, you’ve been here a nanosecond, and you’re talking about the history of CityCycle. Councillor interjecting. Councillor WYNDHAM: You need to know the history of CityCycle. Chairman: Order! Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Order! Councillor WYNDHAM: Great call, Councillor SUTTON. Chairman: Order! Councillor WYNDHAM: You need to know a little more of— Chairman: Order! Councillor WYNDHAM! When you have all composed yourself, we will continue. Councillor WYNDHAM: Well, I don’t think we’re going to continue. Chairman: Councillor WYNDHAM! Section 51— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Now that there is some decorum in the Chamber, we will continue. Councillor WYNDHAM.

Councillor WYNDHAM: Councillor CASSIDY, CityCycle—let’s have a look at it. If you talked to the students around the city, of which there’s about 75,000 to 80,000 international students, many of them use CityCycle on a regular basis. Madam Chair, if they would be getting around the city using other forms of transport instead of CityCycle, we would certainly see a lot more older cars on our streets, because they are here maybe for three or four years. They’re using CityCycle as it was intended for—for people visiting the city or for short trips, and it’s happening more regularly, more often. I note this week that Sydney is about to start a CityCycle scheme—surprise, surprise. Melbourne’s got one. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY! Stop interjecting. Councillor WYNDHAM: It is such a great financial advantage for our city that we can have these available for people doing business or study within our city. The students are bringing hundreds of millions of dollars into the city, and you begrudge the fact that we have a CityCycle program that assists them greatly and assists others that want to travel short trips greatly. While we’re on CityCycle, it’s one of our travel choices that people have. Many people choose to use their own cycle, as we’ve said. We’ve got students doing Active School Travel, and if you look at the statistics of Active School Travel, Madam Chair, we’ve got about 20% of students walking to school, about three per cent car-pooling, others using public transport, scootering and cycling. Madam Chair, Active School Travel is where we start educating our students, our children, to use other forms of transport other than the car. All this adds to a system where we have less congestion around our schools. As they see that less congestion around their schools, they will introduce that into their lives, just as Councillor CASSIDY is about to introduce the cycle into his life. Maybe he should go out and do as I’ve done and buy an e-bike. It certainly makes the commute very pleasant, and of course, enjoyable. Madam Chair, let’s just work together on this, because all I’ve heard from the other side is the politics of it, not the solutions or ‘let’s get on board with this’. Metro is the future. We look at London. When London got its first metro—yes, it’s an older fashion system with tracks and trains—but its population then was greater than what Brisbane is now, and throughout history it has expanded. Similarly, Metro throughout history will expand. You’ve got to learn to live for the future as well as for today. You’ve got to develop systems for the future. The trouble with people today and politics is people want it instantly. I remember when microwaves were really fast. Now people think, God, I’ve got to put it in the microwave for 30 seconds. That’s slow. Well, Madam Chair, life doesn’t get any faster or faster, life stays the same, but we have to work towards the future—take time to look at what can be developed for the future, so those in the future have a better life, not an instant life. Life isn’t like McDonalds—do you want fries with that? It’s about value adding for a better solution for future generations, and Metro will do that, and it will do it in spades because it will be delivering ‘turn up and go’ services. You walk on to the platform, you look left, and here comes the Metro. Increased capacity over the bus network, so, therefore the bus network that’s in place, the capacity will be able to be increased for the population to travel on it. What a great idea —utilising something that’s already in place and improving upon it, developing it, expanding it. Madam Chair, when I talk to people out there, they are looking forward to it. So, I call on you on the other side to get behind the Metro. Like the trams, all I can say is, ‘two to the Valley’. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SUTTON.

Councillor SUTTON: Thank you, Madam Chair. What a tough act to follow that will be. But I rise to enter the debate into Program 1. Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor WINES! Councillor SUTTON: I’m going to talk about a couple of different elements, but I’m going to start with footpaths, Madam Chair, because I think that’s important. I think that is a piece of basic Council infrastructure that is extremely important, that perhaps this Administration, I think, has really failed the people of Brisbane in terms of delivery. I note Councillor SCHRINNER got up in his introductory speech and talked about the needs of, you know, parents pushing prams, and both Councillor SCHRINNER and I are pram-pushing parents, but he does not—and Councillor SIMMONDS is about to become one—but, Madam Chair, he still doesn’t seem to get the value of footpaths for people in all suburbs. The fact of the matter is, LORD MAYOR Graham QUIRK, when he was in charge of the Infrastructure portfolio, let our footpaths get so bad that, if you had laid them end to end, they would have stretched from Brisbane to Bundaberg. That is how bad they had deteriorated. In response to political pressure put on him from the Labor Councillors, he established the Ward Footpaths Fund, which was an allocation that every Councillor got of $320,000 each year to spend on footpaths and footpaths only. I will give credit where it’s due. That was a good initiative. But fast forward to when he became LORD MAYOR, he has then changed that policy to provide just $398,000 per ward for Councillors, and now communities and Councillors have to decide whether or not they are going to spend that money on either park upgrades or footpaths. Madam Chair, when you represent a ward like Morningside Ward—and I’m sure other Councillors in other parts of the city are in the same position—both are important for our demographics—both are. So, what it actually meant was there was a net reduction in the amount of money available to spend on footpaths, because if you divided it 50/50, into a parks playground and footpaths, it was about $200,000 each. So it was actually a net loss in the amount of money that was available to spend on footpaths each year. So, it was $398,000. That, in the budget, has nominally increased, but it’s increased because of the way we now account and do our accounting to include the corporate overheads for those Ward Park Trust Funds. The amount of money is still the same. So, since 2012, there has not been one additional cent provided for footpath funding in this city. That is in light of increasing construction costs, increasing inflation rates, and additional revenue received by this Administration from their massive rates hikes. I’m just putting on the record now—that is not good enough. I know that I have a massive backlog of both footpaths and playgrounds. I know what every single cent of my Ward Parks Trust Fund money is likely to be spent on from now until 2020, because there is a backlog of both playgrounds and footpaths that I am trying to answer the needs of my ward. It is not enough. Now, Councillor ADAMS, in her budget reply speech, indicated that there was an additional $11 million in the budget for new footpaths, but when Councillor SCHRINNER was asked about this phantom money that Councillor ADAMS referenced, he said he didn’t know what she was talking about. Clearly the disconnect between the two of them is massive. They’re too busy doing the numbers against each other. I want to call on the LORD MAYOR and Councillor SCHRINNER to find more money for footpaths, new concrete footpaths in future budgets, because what they have allocated this year is simply not enough. CityCycle—on CityCycle, interesting contribution to the debate by Councillor WYNDHAM that CityCycle was done for the Asian students. I find that kind of statement quite interesting, to say the very least. But CityCycle was apparently going to be a cost-neutral transport revolution for this city. Well,

Madam Chair, we’re still waiting for the revolution to come. All CityCycle has done for this city is given us more than 152 billboards cluttering up the city’s footpaths, all those billboards, with the big yellow lettering up the side, funding CityCycle. Well, clearly it’s not, because in the life of this contract so far it’s already cost us $15 million, or $10 to $15 million. No one actually knows the real figure because they’re experts at hiding it. This was supposed to be a cost-neutral contract. We still have about 11 years to go on this contract, Madam Chair. That does not bode well for the huge amount of money this contract will ultimately end up costing Brisbane residents, when this LORD MAYOR and the LNP Administration said that it was not going to cost us anything, if we just swallowed all these billboards around our city streets. Bus safety—as Councillor CASSIDY indicated, the Labor Councillors support the implementation of the recommendations of the bus safety review. But the LNP has said in this place time and time again that it’s not their problem, and that the State Government should do something about that. So, Madam Chair, it is our problem. These are our drivers. They’re our employees, and it’s our residents who travel on these buses. But we know from the budget documents that this Council will be paying for security on buses, but just how much? The DEPUTY MAYOR confirmed that $668,333 will be spent on security services for buses this year, but if we dig a little deeper, we find out that that is a combined State Government and Council commitment. So, remember, the State Government had to do something about this, according to this Council, but neither the LORD MAYOR, or the DEPUTY MAYOR, until he was questioned in the Information Session, has actually acknowledged that that breakdown of that $668,000, is that $582,704 is being picked up by the State Government, while just $85,629 is being invested by this Council. They’re always happy to take credit for somebody else’s work, Madam Chair. Just 13% of the funding for security guards on our bus fleet is going to be paid by Brisbane City Council. The remainder will be paid by the State Government, who they have been calling on to do something. Now, we’re not calling for millions of extra dollars to be spent. We wanted to see a measured increase to address the rising incidence of bus driver assaults. Even if you doubled this Administration’s investment in security for our buses, we would be spending less on security than we will on a piano refurbishment in City Hall. As it stands, our investment in security for our bus drivers and passengers accounts for 0.003% of our annual budget, and that is a disgrace, an absolute disgrace, and says a huge amount about the value this Administration places on our hardworking bus drivers in this city. Madam Chair, finally we turn to Metro. Councillor SCHRINNER wants a pat on the back about how much this Administration is contributing to Metro, and no other council, no other local authority, no other local authority puts as much into public transport or public transport infrastructure as Brisbane City Council. Councillor interjecting. Councillor SUTTON: Maybe except for the City of Sydney, who’s investing $220 million in the Sydney light rail, but he doesn’t mention that. There are other councils— Councillor interjecting. Councillor SUTTON: There are other councils that are putting in funding for public transport infrastructure, but no one else does it, Madam Chair, if you believe the DEPUTY MAYOR. No one else does it, you know—but no, the claim is false, Madam Chair. There are plenty other local governments around this State and around this country that invest in public transport services. But, Madam Chair, it’s amazing the road to Damascus, the Liberal National Party has been on when it comes to public transport infrastructure, because we remember—we remember, all the smiles on the LNP faces across there, when Campbell Newman on his very first day on the job as Lord Mayor proudly went down, posed for a photo, ripping out the Ann Street bus lane, ripping out the

Ann Street bus lane. I remember the photo on the front page of The Courier-Mail, with the sign over his back as he dutifully carried it away after the Labor Administration had established them and were trying to encourage bus— Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, your time has expired. Further debate? Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on item 1, Transport for Brisbane. I guess I’d start by re-emphasising what should be an obvious point, but which I think too many Councillors in this place forget, which is that investment in public and active transport will save millions of dollars in road investment and road maintenance costs in future years. I guess for me the striking thing about this Program 1, is how little investment there is in public transport. Now I know some Councillors will say, ‘but we’re investing millions’. But it’s not enough. Compared to the amount that we’re investing on roads, it pales in insignificance. I’d like to start by talking about the Brisbane Metro, talk briefly about some pretty disappointing outcomes in bike lanes, talk specifically about some public transport needs in my ward of The Gabba, and also touch on concerns about under-investment in footpaths. So, having a look through the business case for the Metro, I’m increasingly convinced that it’s not such a terrible project. I’ll give you guys that. But I still have some significant concerns about the specifics of the design. I share the Labor Party’s concerns about the funding model, and I’d hasten to emphasise that I don’t think it is the best use of public transport spending. I think we would get better bang for buck spending this sort of money on a network-wide review, on new bike routes to connect the suburbs, and more localised, targeted projects. I think the process by which Council arrived at the Metro is fraught and concerning, and seems to be driven largely by electioneering, rather than by best practice, long-term planning approaches to Metro. I was particularly concerned during the Budget Information Sessions to hear that Council has not clearly and wholeheartedly committed to the Metro vehicles being low emission or zero emission vehicles. I understand that during the process of excluding track-based, high-capacity public transport and saying, ‘okay, the Metro is the best option’, very little weight was given to the sustainability of the vehicles themselves. Generally speaking, one of the strongest advantages of track-based public transport systems is that they can run on electricity, rather than diesel or petrol or gas, and my concern here is that that wasn’t factored into the business case or the options analysis and given enough weight. Obviously it’s better for us to be delivering a public transport system where people are on buses rather than driving their own cars, so for that reason I think, okay, if the buses are running off fossil fuels, that’s still better than people driving fossil fuel driven cars. But I still question that process, and question how much weighting has been given to ensuring that we have the highest possible, or best-practice sustainability vehicles in this fleet. I’d appreciate hearing from the DEPUTY MAYOR more about that. I’m sure it’s on your radar, but I want to emphasise that it needs to be very high on the list. I think it would be a huge missed opportunity if we spent close to $1 billion on a public transport system that still runs off fossil fuels. I’m seeing cities all around the world that are shifting to high-capacity, high-frequency public transport services that run on electricity and can therefore be powered by renewable energy. Particularly at a time when we know at some point global fuel prices are going to continue to rise, it would be very surprising and disappointing to me if the Metro project relies on petrol for its fleet. Which brings me to that broader question about future-proofing and flexibility. Some of the Councillors opposite talked about how the Metro will be rolled out further in the future, and perhaps the networks will be extended. But I don’t see a lot of evidence as to how that’s going to be feasible, given the current designs

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 103 and the way the project is being rolled out at the moment. I have talked to some transport planners and engineers who have expressed concerns about the gradients of the tunnels through the inner city, which will preclude future adaptability for other forms of public transport through that corridor. So if in 30 years we do want to switch to some sort of track-based system through the busway corridor, it may well be much more difficult because of those gradients of the tunnels. I’m not raising this as a direct criticism, I’m just asking it as a question. I want to know if the Administration has thought seriously about this, and to what extent concerns about gradients of the tunnels were factored into the business case. Similarly, I’m concerned about whether or not the stations, or the stations at the end of the lines, will be designed to have good connectivity back up to ground level and the rest of the bus network. Obviously one of the biggest advantages of having a non-track-based system is that those vehicles can then travel on ordinary suburban road corridors further out away from the busway, and I’ve seen that work well in other cities. But here it seems like we’re adopting—we may well be adopting a system and approach where we need that dedicated busway because of the size of the vehicles and the way they’re designed and the way the stations work, but we won’t have the flexibility benefits of those vehicles being able to work further out in the suburbs if we do want to extend the networks later on. So I’d like more information about that as well. I’d also strongly question the fact that this Metro project, based on what I’ve seen in the business case so far, will significantly reduce pedestrian and cyclist accessibility and connectivity between Brisbane Square and the Cultural Centre. As probably Councillors have realised, the western or the upstream side footpath of Victoria Bridge, after this upgrade, you wouldn’t be able to cross directly from the bridge to Brisbane Square. That western pathway will curve around to Adelaide Street and force pedestrians to take a long detour around to get back to the Queen Street Mall and get back to Brisbane Square. So we’re actually making it more difficult for pedestrians to travel from one side of the river to the other. That’s not best-practice planning. Talk to any sensible transport planner. They’ll tell you that, in terms of funding allocations and prioritisation of space on the road network, the priority is pedestrians, then cyclists, then public transport, then cars. Unfortunately, this Administration’s spending priorities and road space allocation priorities seem to run in the opposite direction. We give the most space and the most money to car projects and car transport, and the least to bikes and pedestrians. That’s quite—I guess we see that here in this project, where we’re actually proposing to reduce overall the amount of bike access over the bridge. I know those existing bike lanes are pretty narrow. That’s why very few people feel safe using them, but they are an important connector. So we’re—and particularly for residents of the inner southside, they’re losing vehicle access over the bridge— fair enough, I can understand the arguments of that, but we’re taking away the ability for someone in West End or South Brisbane to drive over the bridge, and we’re also making it much, much harder for them to cycle over the bridge. Suburbs like West End aren’t actually seeing any direct benefits from this project, so we’re actually in a way reducing connectivity for some of those innermost suburbs as a result of this project. I understand it’s a complex project, and I know that the bridge is only so wide and we can’t squeeze everything on there, but I haven’t seen enough evidence that you’ve seriously explored and considered alternative ways of ensuring that dedicated bike lanes can remain on the bridge. I know it’s an old bridge. I know that adding platforms can be costly and there are a lot of engineering challenges involved in that, but it’s been done before in Brisbane, and I’d like to see a cost-benefit analysis around that. I’d also like to note that you’re widening one—or you’re proposing to widen one pedestrian footpath on the bridge, but that you’re not widening the side that needs bikes, and that’s the side where there’s the highest conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists, that upstream, western side of the bridge.

So the fact that there’s high conflicts between, particularly tourists who are stopping to take photos, and cyclists using that footpath, and the fact that the existing bike lanes are really, really narrow and dangerous, means few cyclists are currently using the bridge, but that doesn’t mean we can’t aspire to have more cyclists travelling over that network or over that bridge point in the future. So I encourage and implore the Administration to think seriously about improving cycling connectivity across the bridge rather than reducing it, and to recognise that you are actually going to make it harder for pedestrians to travel across the bridge and across that point of the river based on the plans I’ve seen so far. I also, as noted, have concerns about the funding plan. I don’t understand why the Council doesn’t just fund it completely. I don’t understand why you don’t just take on extra debt and fund this thing and get it built, rather than creating the uncertainty about— Chairman: Councillor SRI, your time has expired. Further debate? LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR: Yes, thanks very much, Madam Chairman. I’m very pleased to enter the debate into Program 1, Madam Chairman, because it is certainly a key program within this budget in terms of the priorities of this Administration. I certainly, Madam Chairman, appreciate the comments that we’ve had this morning around the Metro, or at least most of them. Madam Chairman, I take on board Councillor SRI’s comments. They were said in good faith, as his own views, in terms of the project. There are some elements in that which we would agree on, although suffice to say that we have invested an enormous amount of time in looking at many of those issues that he has raised. Madam Chairman, the debate this morning has been an interesting one, because we have on the table a project which we’re saying we’re putting two-thirds of the money into, and this budget makes the first $50 million instalment for the Metro. On the other hand, we’ve got Councillor CUMMING saying that, you know, ‘what are you going to do. You get two-thirds of the way through and then stop’. Well, Madam Chairman, I don’t know what ‘Mr 10%’ was going to do with regard to the light rail project, but it wasn’t going to get very far down the track on that synopsis, Madam Chairman. I would say this, though—that we are very confident in terms of the Metro. In terms of the Gold Coast Light Rail comparison, Gold Coast Light Rail throughout its entire day at the moment carries less passengers than what we will be able to carry in one hour on the Brisbane Metro in terms of the capacity. They are very different projects, Madam Chairman, and value-for-money wise, we believe that the cost of this project against the increase in capacity of what it will give to this city makes it very much a worthwhile project. It’s not to say that we’re not going to be out there having discussions. We’ve demonstrated how it can be funded, Madam Chairman. There are many models to funding that can be adopted, and we’re not closing our mind off to any form of that. One of the next phases will be to seek market views and understand what the market might be able to do in relation to the project, Madam Chairman. We’re not going to close off any options in regard to that, but what we’ve been able to do in this budget is to demonstrate that it is a doable and affordable project, and that we can do it within our borrowing capacity. Madam Chairman, the other key components of this budget are—I want to refer to bikeways. In the budget, of course, we have some $26 million allocated to bikeways this year. Councillor CUMMING was giving some commentary there about, ‘well, never mind the amount you’re spending, tell us what the length is’. It reminds me of that old sitcom, you know, Never Mind the Quality, Feel the Width. Madam Chairman, it’s about the hard bits. The easy bits have been done to a large extent in this city. We’re now into those more difficult sections of

bikeway which are greater engineering challenges, which are more costly by the nature of those. When you do look at the bikeway spend, if there’s one big winner, it’s certainly Councillor SRI. I noted that nearly $14 million of the $26 million is being spent in Woolloongabba Ward. This is always the risk when you pull out little bits of a budget, Madam Chairman. So, in this particular area, Councillor SRI has been a big winner. In other areas of the budget, he’s probably not going to be such as big winner. But in this one, he’s certainly won the casket, and rightly so, because, Madam Chairman, again it is in the some of the more difficult inner city areas where we’ve got to create the connections to go to the next phase. I know that Councillor CASSIDY made a comment, Madam Chairman, that, you know, you’ve got to get out there and talk. Their policy was just to talk to the cycling community, to the BUG groups, Madam Chairman. That was the Labor way. Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: Yes, well, you know, Madam Chairman, talking is something you can do. Madam Chairman, they did a lot of talking in the old days, but they only spent twenty five million a term. So, Councillor SRI, in terms of your passion for cycling, you need to understand the history of this. $25 million in a term is all they were spending. When we arrived in this place, the first thing we did— Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: —was to lift that to— Chairman: Councillor SUTTON! LORD MAYOR: —$100 million, Madam Chairman, in the first term. It went to $120 million or $125 million, was it—no, $120 in the second term, and then, Madam Chairman, in this term, $100 million, plus a guarantee of doing them on the major infrastructure builds. So the Telegraph Road project, the Kingsford Smith Drive, the Wynnum Road project—these are big, big add-on costs, Madam Chairman, and they are plus the $100 million that we are spending. I want to talk about footpaths. You know, I heard Councillor SUTTON here on about the footpath spend, Madam Chairman. She might recall that, when we set this Ward Footpath Trust Fund up, it was off the back at the time of a new revenue source around parking meters. We wanted to undertake some parking meters in areas where there was high demand for parking and, Madam Chairman, we committed to making the funds available through a Footpath Trust Fund. So this was additional money. Now, Madam Chairman, I’m hearing today that we’re not spending enough on footpaths. If Councillors feel that that’s the case, we might have to look at reverting this fund back to a footpath-only fund. I took the measure, Madam Chairman, as LORD MAYOR of this city, to give Councillors some greater flexibility around their spend in their wards. I did that on the back of information that I had been given which showed a significant improvement in the footpath condition. But if ward Councillors are saying to me here today that the condition is still not good out there, I am very happy to revert this back to a footpath-only fund. Very happy to do that. I can do it, Madam Chairman. But I just say that, while Councillor SUTTON is out there complaining about footpaths, and she had what she said $400,000 approximately—I think the figure she used was $398,000—she had that to spend, she could have spent it on footpaths, but I understand, Councillor SUTTON, you came to the Committee for Parks and wanting to spend $350,000 from that fund on one project, which was the installation of a skate park facility. Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Order! LORD MAYOR: Her footpaths are in such terrible condition that her greatest priority was to spend money, Madam Chairman, on a new facility. So she could be out there—

Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor SUTTON! LORD MAYOR: So she could be out there and make a big person of herself— Councillor SUTTON: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SUTTON. Councillor SUTTON: Claim to be misrepresented. Chairman: Thank you. LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR: Well, you can claim to be misrepresented all you like. You’ve got control of this fund. It is the one thing that Councillors have got total control of in terms of your local area. Of course, because of the extent of the funding that you wanted to put to the skate park, you had to come to Committee. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor MURPHY! LORD MAYOR: Now, all I’m saying— Chairman: Councillor MURPHY! LORD MAYOR: All I’m saying, Madam Chairman, is I broadened this out to give Councillors some greater flexibility of spend within their areas. But if we’re saying footpaths are still a problem— Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: Well, I might have to reconsider the position. I might have to reconsider that seriously. If you are saying— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! LORD MAYOR: If you are saying— Chairman: Order! LORD MAYOR: Well, I—whoa, I wouldn’t be—I’m not bad on dares, Madam Chairman. I’m not bad on dares, Madam Chairman, and I just say that Councillor SUTTON, that fund has been increased to $448,000 this year, and if you are seriously saying to me that the footpath conditions are a big, big issue— Councillor SUTTON: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SUTTON. LORD MAYOR: —then you need to put your money where your mouth is, locally. Councillor SUTTON: I’m going to claim to be misrepresented on that point again, too. Chairman: Thank you. LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR: Well, Madam Chairman, I’m just saying, Councillor SUTTON needs to put her money where her mouth is locally if that is a big issue in her ward— Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: —a big issue in her ward. Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, you had your opportunity to speak. This is the LORD MAYOR’s turn. He has the floor. I can barely hear him on the microphone because of your interjecting. You’ve got two points of misrepresentation. You’ll get an opportunity to make your statement then. LORD MAYOR.

LORD MAYOR: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. So, Madam Chairman, there also seems to be this dichotomy they have. So, the subsidy, which we’re talking about, the operating costs we spend on buses, $123 million, Labor seem to have the view, yes, go for your lives, spend as much as you want in terms of operating costs. So, all right. That’s the one thing that we do that other councils don’t do. Other councils have certainly put in some money around capital costs. I can instance Moreton Regional Council on their rail project. I can instance, of course, Gold Coast Council. Sydney City Council has been raised. But we are the only Council that puts in the amount of money we do on operating costs. Now, Madam Chairman, it seems that the Labor Party are saying, ‘you should spend that amount on operating costs, but don’t you dare spend one cent on cycling operating costs’, Madam Chairman, through the CityCycle scheme. Now, this is an extraordinary contradiction— Councillor CASSIDY: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Claim to be misrepresented. Chairman: Thank you. LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR: There seems to be a lot of— Chairman: LORD MAYOR, unfortunately your time has expired. Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, you had two points of misrepresentation. Councillor SUTTON; Yes, Madam Chair. The LORD MAYOR claimed that I was deliberately prioritising funding for a local skate park over footpaths in my ward. I was very, very clear in my speech, I have great demand for both, and I have backlogs of requests for both, and this is the one that we’re pursuing at the moment. I also said— Chairman: Right, to your next point. Councillor SUTTON: —that I had at least, until 2020, I knew where things had to be spent because of the backlog for both footpaths and— Chairman: Councillor SUTTON— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor WINES! Order! Councillor SUTTON, to your second point of misrepresentation, please. Councillor SUTTON: The second point of misrepresentation is the LORD MAYOR misrepresenting the amount of funding for footpaths and parks upgrades in the Ward Parks and Footpaths Trust Fund. The actual amount of dollars that we have to spend are about $398,000. The rest is corporate overheads. He keeps talking about— Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SUTTON Councillor SUTTON: —the total figure. It is not the correct— Chairman: Order! Councillor SUTTON: —sum of money we’ve got— Chairman: Order! Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS!

Councillor SUTTON, you’ve made your points of misrepresentation. Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Yes, thanks, Madam Chair. What I specifically talked about when it came to CityCycle was that this Administration, the LNP in this place, got up here time and time again, and out in the public, and claimed that it would be— Chairman: To the point of misrepresentation, not a diatribe. Councillor CASSIDY: —that CityCycle—thanks, Madam Chair—that CityCycle would be cost-neutral, and in fact would deliver a positive revenue of $9 million over the 20-year contract. That’s what I said. Chairman: Thank you, Councillor CASSIDY, you’ve made your point of misrepresentation. Further debate? Councillor WINES.

ADJOURNMENT: 649/2016-17 At that time, 10.30am, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Fiona KING, that the meeting adjourn for a period of 15 minutes, to commence only when all Councillors had vacated the Chamber and the doors have been locked.

Council stood adjourned at 10.32am.

UPON RESUMPTION:

Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes, thanks, Madam Chair, I rise to speak on Transport for Brisbane, Program 1. Can I just say that I was very disappointed with this particular section of the budget. It really misses the needs of residents and business that I represent, be it for footpaths, bikeways or public transport. A lot has been said about footpaths in the debate so far. But I represent a ward that raises, as I understand, the third in terms of rates revenue, yet it does not receive that equivalent— Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor CUMMING! Councillor GRIFFITHS: —in terms of services. It is one of the biggest wards on the southside, and certainly I believe one of the most disadvantaged. It certainly has many people on lower incomes, and has lots of businesses there. Essentially, Moorooka Ward is a ward that supports the city, but it’s not the glamorous part of the city that seems to receive all the money. It’s interesting that, with my footpath list, we have a footpath list of over 50 that have been listed and waiting for construction. This doesn’t include footpaths that are missing along major roads, such as Beaudesert Road, Watson Road, Beatty Road, Mortimer Road—the list goes on. I was interested to hear the LORD MAYOR, with the LMSIF (Lord Mayor’s Suburban Initiative Fund) funding, was saying that that’s enough to build your footpaths. Well, I can tell you—it isn’t enough to build the footpaths and to do the park projects as well. I give you an example. I always split my funding half-half, and that builds about five footpaths. At the moment the money for this year has already been allocated to people with disability or accessibility issues. So we have one resident ring up who can’t get their wheelchair to the nearest concrete footpath, so they need $50,000 or $60,000 spent putting a footpath in. Really, the choice is, do we have residents isolated in their homes and not provide a footpath, or do we get on and build the footpaths? With more and more people staying at home who have a

disability, and more and more older people, more and more—I think we should be providing footpaths for families who have prams—I, as a Councillor out my way, can’t keep up with that demand. An example that I have that’s gone on for a number of years is a lady who requests access, because of her disability, to the nearest bus stop. To build the footpath to get to that bus stop is going to take $100,000. That’s $100,000 for one person to access a bus. That’s a lot of money, but what other choice do we have? Madam Chair, I have these projects listed as capital, but Labor capital projects never seem to get funded. So this is a convenient— Councillors interjecting. Councillor GRIFFITHS: No, no, I challenge—I actually challenge— Chairman: Order! Councillor GRIFFITHS: I challenge the LORD MAYOR in the last 10 budgets to go through and find any capital funding for Moorooka Ward for footpaths. There’s been none. So, in terms of looking after these people, we are dependent on a small bucket of money. That bucket of money is $440,000, I believe, and it sounds like a lot of money. It’s certainly very convenient politically because, the LORD MAYOR can go, ‘well, talk to your Councillor. It’s up to him to deal with’. But the reality is we’re very limited with what we can do with that money compared to, in my ward, the need that is out there. I certainly believe that this funding needs to rise. Similarly—and we’ll talk about this again in Parks, when I spend half my money on parks projects, I only actually, say in this budget, have received one project in terms of capital. So, it’s a very difficult situation. It’s a situation that needs to be addressed on need, and it’s a situation that we need to take genuinely if we are to live up to our standards, in terms of what we say we deliver for the community in relation to disability and accessibility. Now, bikeways—that’s the next one that always interests me. In 2016 we had a death of a cyclist on Paradise and Learoyd Roads. The cyclist was hit by a truck. I’m often approached by people in the south-western suburbs, not the inner city suburbs—that seems to be well catered for with bikeways—but the industrial areas, the residential areas around industrial areas have no bikeways, none at all. And they’re not likely to receive any. So there is no money for bikeways in Acacia Ridge, Archerfield, Willawong, Rocklea, Pallara, Coopers Plains, Durack or Oxley. Yes, these are the industrial areas of the city. Yes, residents live there. Yes, people work there. And yes, there are many trucks and heavy vehicles on the roads. Why don’t we have a plan for delivery of something in these areas, particularly when we’re still not even providing footpaths for people to ride on? So, I’ve had cyclists say, ‘well, at least can we get a footpath along Beaudesert Road so we don’t have to ride along the road with the trucks?’ Well, we can’t get the funding for that. Madam Chair, it’s a very disappointing budget in terms of what’s deliverable for basic needs in my ward. I also want to say that that one death is one death too many. Really, I think the priority needs to be on providing safe footpaths. The argument needs to be about safe footpaths, safe accessibility, and not just squabble over, ‘you get this much money and how do you spend it’. It needs to be on providing safe refuge for pedestrians and cyclists. Now, similarly, Metro. This argument just keeps repeating itself. It’s Metro in name. It’s a bus project, and it’s a bus project on State Government infrastructure. That’s clear. It’s so different. It’s chalk and cheese compared to what the LORD MAYOR put up originally. It’s chalk and cheese. It seems to have a lot of common sense to it. I don’t take away from the common sense to it, but let’s face it—it’s a bus project, it’s not a metro project.

You know, once again, be upfront with residents. Tell them the truth. There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s all right to say, ‘we’ve changed our mind’. Finally, my big issue is the driver safety. I’ve had many, many drivers approach me. The bus union has approached me. We’ve raised this in the Chamber numerous times. To spend $85,000 by this Council on security is appalling. It is appalling, particularly when we know we had the death last year of Manmeet and we’ve had numerous assaults since then. For us to not increase that amount, for us not to put it up so that we can ensure that there’s more safety on our buses. We’re not saying every bus needs a security driver. What we’re saying is, let’s increase safety on the bus routes that are dangerous. Certainly, one of those routes is through my ward. Bus drivers tell me that. Residents tell me they’re worried. It’s an issue. So I think that’s so disappointing that we aren’t increasing the money we’re spending on security for our bus staff and for our patrons. We should be making sure that these buses are safe. Finally, Madam Chair, the point the LORD MAYOR keeps making, and the LNP keep making, is how much Council contributes to public transport. Would they not like to contribute to public transport? Would they like to put it out there and say, ‘we’re going to cut public transport funding’. Let the residents of Brisbane know. Is that your stance? Is that what you’re saying to residents? Because, if it is, say it clearly, because on this side of the Chamber, we support funding public transport. We believe public transport is our future, and we believe in making it even better. Madam Chair, this is a very disappointing budget. It’s really showing that rates, particularly in my communities, where there are poorer homes, they’re actually paying well above the average, but the deliverables are down. Thank you. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SIMMONDS. Councillor SIMMONDS: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I rise to support Program 1 within this 2017-18 Budget, Transport for Brisbane. I obviously very strongly support Program 1 under the guidance of the DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor SCHRINNER. It’s obviously an area that I’m quite nostalgic about, having spent some time in the Public Transport section, and what always strikes me about the debate in this particular portfolio from the Labor Councillors opposite, time and time again, I find myself asking the question, why does Labor hate public transport? Why? Why? Because this Administration shows time and time again why we are the best friend that public transport in this city has ever had. It’s scary, it’s scary when it’s me who has to stand up and provide a history lesson in this place, but let’s just— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Councillor SUTTON! Councillor SIMMONDS: But let’s just remember, let’s just remember, under the previous Labor administration the bus fleet in this city had a tendency to catch itself on fire. ‘Chariots of fire’, screamed the headline at the time. They can talk as they did in their debate about how many buses are being delivered by this Administration above the numbers that are being retired. But remember, it was the previous Labor administration who couldn’t even keep up with retirements. It went backwards. In fact, every year, year after year, the Labor administration would stand up in this place, promise to deliver a number of buses, and fail to deliver them. We have always delivered the number of buses that we said we would every year, and then they wouldn’t keep up with retirements. That’s why they had a fleet that was ageing, whereas this Administration has the youngest fleet in Australia. That’s why their fleet wasn’t air-conditioned, whereas this Administration has a 100% air-conditioned fleet, and it’s why the

previous Labor administration had buses that were non-disability compliant, non-kneeling buses, whereas this Administration has a fleet of kneeling buses to support those people. You know, the Labor Opposition will say, oh well, ‘I’m stuck in the past’. But it’s them who are stuck in the past, because let’s think, at the latest election, what was their policy? They recycled an old trams policy from the Beattie/Soorley era. They are stuck in the past. This is a tired Opposition when it comes to public transport. The debate that they’ve put forward on the Metro, from the Labor Councillors opposite, is all about spin. They’re stuck on the type of vehicles. It haunts Councillor CASSIDY at night, but let’s go back to the fundamental issues. What is the fundamental issue for public transport in our city? It is the pinch point at the Cultural Centre. Does anyone disagree? Councillor CASSIDY, by all means, interject if you disagree. No, I’m hearing silence. So if that is the fundamental problem, if that is the fundamental problem, support a Metro that puts that underground and provides more capacity. What was their solution? Trams that would have reduced capacity at that pinch point because it would have taken road space. They would have run the track straight through, and in fact they would have had to rebuild the bridge to do it. They didn’t factor that into their costings. So, if the fundamental problem— Councillors interjecting. Councillor SIMMONDS: If the fundamental problem for public transport is to address that capacity issue, then why reduce capacity by putting tracks through the road space, and why reduce capacity by doing a transition that replicates an existing well-working bus system, with a tram that carries what—what does the Gold Coast carry, about 15,000 a day—instead of a Metro that can carry up to 22,000 per hour. So who is solving the fundamental public transport problem in this city? Well, it’s this Administration and this budget, isn’t it? So, as long as the Labor Councillors opposite continue to advocate for a tram system, which will in fact do the opposite and reduce the amount of people that we can carry on public transport, I’m very happy that we are—that it is this side of the Administration that is pushing forward the Metro. Just to expand a little bit on where the LORD MAYOR was heading with CityCycle, well, first of all, find me a type of public transport that isn’t subsidised to some extent. Public transport isn’t a money spinner, and nor should it be. It should be about providing options to people to travel within our city, and that’s exactly what CityCycle does. But what Councillor CASSIDY neglects to say— Councillor interjecting. Councillor SIMMONDS: What Councillor CASSIDY neglects to say, as he’s auditioning to be Leader of the Opposition, is that in order to meet his calculations that we’ve broken some promise about whether or not it would break even, he is discounting the amount of free advertising, the value of the free advertising we get around the world to promote our beautiful city. That’s advertising that we use to get international tourists here, that support retail jobs, support jobs in the tourism industry, support jobs in the hotels. Why does the Labor Party hate jobs? Why do they only tell half the story, Madam Chairman? It’s a bit like costing a public transport system without factoring in the cost of the rolling stock. Who did that, for example? Oh, I know, a Labor Government. But Labor love doing that. They love coming up with costings that ignore half the story, and just like they did with Cross River Rail, so Councillor CASSIDY is doing right now when he ignores the millions of dollars in value that this city gets by being able to promote itself to overseas markets. Councillor CUMMING talked about delivering footpaths as part of developments. He claimed that we just don’t do it. It doesn’t happen. Now, I know that to be false. I know that to be false. How do I know it to be false?

Because I know a particular developer who was conditioned to put a footpath in as part of their development, and delivered it. Who was that? Councillor GRIFFITHS. There you go. There you go. There is an example in this very Chamber. I didn’t have to go very far to find an example of a developer that’s been required to deliver a footpath. I only had to look across within Councillor CUMMING’s own party room to find a Councillor who did a development, was conditioned by this Council, condition number 35 in his development approval, in case anybody wants to look it up, to deliver a footpath. So there you go, Councillor CUMMING—try not to sell your entire party room down the river. We know that you do that when you stand up and say that you want to protect pre-1946 homes and then demolish your own, but try not to sell everybody else in your party room down the river as well. Give them some credit, because, to his credit, deliver the footpath he did. Madam Chairman, I also wanted to talk specifically as well about a local project, the Indooroopilly bike and pedestrian Riverwalk along Radnor Street. This is part of the funding in the 2017-18 Budget, to continue the detailed design for this project, so that construction can begin as part of the forwards. This was an election commitment of mine to the local area. It will be a very valuable missing link, and it’s a great example of how this Administration is leveraging off the record funding that we provide for bikeways. As we remember, $100 million over four years, compared to the Labor Party, $25 million over four years, and how we leverage it to provide projects that connect missing links and open up our existing bikeway networks to a much larger catchment of people. In this particular circumstance, it will connect the Jack Pesch Bridge as it comes over next to the Walter Taylor Bridge, through to the bikeway on the Western Freeway. So you’re opening up to a catchment of Graceville, Sherwood across, as well as my area, Indooroopilly, Taringa, St Lucia, to access those bikeway network facilities. It will also connect, likewise, the opposite—people who are travelling from Jamboree and those other western suburbs along that freeway bikeway to connect into UQ as well, which is of course a major trip generator. It’s a hard project. It’s a costly project, which is why previous administrations haven’t tackled it. But this Administration has never been scared of doing the tough projects, as long as they show a positive benefit. I might also add that, when the Labor Councillors opposite talk about footpath funding, they don’t—not only don’t they include the significant projects that are undertaken as part of major road upgrades that we do, like the LORD MAYOR mentioned with Kingsford Smith Drive and the facilities that are being located there, but they don’t count these kind of projects either. So in my case, the Riverwalk in Indooroopilly will be a separated bikeway and pedestrian facility. So it’s going to enable a significant increase in pedestrian activity as well, beyond the funding that we are spending on footpaths. There’s community consultation that will occur as part of the 2017-18 Budget funding. I look forward to talk to my community about this, and hopefully this paves the way for a future link into the new Witton Barracks Park as well that we’ve mentioned. The other thing I specifically wanted to support in this year’s budget is, of course, our continued spend on Active School Travel, a fantastic program that is educating our next generation on how we reduce traffic congestion, making sure that they stay healthy and active. I’ve got two schools who participate on an ongoing basis in the program—Indooroopilly State School and— Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SIMMONDS. Further debate? Councillor STRUNK. Councillor STRUNK: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on Program 1 – Transport for Brisbane.

I want to just focus on the proposed new Metro. Well, it’s new because it’s— well, it’s new, obviously, but it’s so much different than the Metro that was announced in 2016. It wouldn’t be unreasonable for Brisbane residents to feel a bit hoodwinked about the Metro that was promised in the 2016 election. It’s nothing like the one now proposed. Why is it different? Well, you know, I suppose I’ll just speak basically. It’s different in respect that the previous proposal for a metro was basically still a rail system. Mind you, of course, it had rubber wheels, so I recall, and the one now proposed, of course, is a bus system, which we’re sort of calling it a banana bus system, and it’s a system that actually isn’t fixed to rails. It’s a system that we, I suppose in some respect, we already have in place. Mind you, of course, the new buses, of course are very much larger and will certainly carry more passengers. Now, the reason behind the changes, of course, there was big piece of infrastructure that Council didn’t do due diligence in securing before they did the announcement, and that of course was the Goprint site over in Woolloongabba or South Brisbane. They didn’t secure it, and of course the reason they didn’t secure it, probably because they didn’t probably have time. Because they rushed the announcement for the Metro system, because Labor had announced the light rail system. So, why is the cost $1 billion, when we’re not sort of implementing a rail system, considering that, as the DEPUTY MAYOR has said, a rail system of course costs a lot more because it’s going to interfere with a lot of services, and of course there is a lot of extra cost involved with putting it in place. So I just wonder where that $1 billion is going. I know that there is a few hundred million dollars’ worth of rolling stock, but I’m still unclear as to where the rest of the money is going to be spent. The funding for the Metro is not in place as far as we know, and I think it was confirmed today. This, of course, can be a bit problematic. When you don’t at least have a MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) with the State Government in regards to what you’re wanting to do or what funding you’re going to require from them. The new system is a system that will require patrons to break their trip, and of course commuters don’t particularly like to do that. They like to have a good frequency with little disruption in their trip. Madam Chair, the $1 billion isn’t going to assist the connectivity in the suburbs. Madam Chair, if we’re looking at the various activities and results tabled, I would be really surprised at the efficient number—sorry, may I start again. I’m glad to see that this Administration has seen the sense in respect for not wanting to be in competition to Cross River Rail. We have to work with the Palaszczuk State Government and the Federal Government to improve and grow our public transport system and not play party politics in doing so. I am happy to see that the banana bus project will take up the initiative and extend the network to the University of Queensland (UQ). If we truly want to be a first, world-class city, we need to look at better integrated systems that are more responsive to the needs of the residents outside of the CBD and inner city suburbs, unlike that we have seen in my ward and others in 2013 when they cut a number of services. Those two services that really impacted on my ward were two bus services that used to go to the Richlands Train Station, which no longer are in service. So, I know we’re supporting the Program 1, and that’s all I’ve got to say. Thank you. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor WINES. Councillor WINES: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise in support of Program 1 – Transport for Brisbane. I not only support this program, but this budget, for the simple reason it’s about planning for a better future for this city, and funding those projects so

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 114 that the lives of the people of Brisbane will be much improved, their travel times will be reduced, and they can enjoy the lifestyle of our city even more. All the criticism posed by Labor this morning has been based on the fact that they are stuck in the past. The Metro system is about the future. The tram proposal would have been amazing and innovative in 1917, not 2017. Jones was right to remove the trams and replace them with buses. The new bus system that was put in place there was only ever finally retired and replaced by us. The hero vessel of that fleet was called the Leyland Panther, which I’m sure we’ve all ridden on at one point in our lives. I’m looking forward that, now that Labor is calling for trams to come back, I’m sure they’ll be calling for the return of the Leyland Panther, because their ideas are so stuck in the past that the best thing they can do is tear up the guts of the city to put an inefficient and ugly tram system right through the middle of the inner city suburbs. To address the concerns brought up by the Labor Councillors regarding Metro, it is important to remind the Chamber that the harshest, fiercest and most regular critics of the track-based system were the Labor Councillors themselves. You wouldn’t believe that from this morning’s comments. It’s almost that they ache for and miss that project, but the real pain, the real concern that Labor Councillors have about the Brisbane Metro project is that they know it's going to happen. They know that people are going to enjoy it. They know that hundreds of thousands of Brisbane people are going to benefit from the project each and every day, and largely people who reside in their own constituencies. The fact of the matter is that this project will be commencing this term. We will all be enjoying it in the very near future, and it will use existing infrastructure so that it'll be comparatively painless compared to Labor's proposal of trams. Also, I need to talk about bikeways. Now I'll identify a bikeway here—the Camoola Street Bikeway, Keperra—which is going to be a fantastic local link for the principal purpose of recreation, and I would like to say there's nothing wrong with recreational bikeways. In fact, thousands of people enjoy them each and every day, and I do not understand Labor Councillors' hostility to recreational bikeways. They demand that the agenda of the BUG groups be implemented without question and then criticise recreational bike links. Well I think it's nice to see families with kids learning to ride bikes out in our suburbs. I think it's good to see people enjoying it on a Sunday afternoon walking their dogs. I think that recreational bike links add something to the city, and I think that the premier one is the Kedron Brook Bikeway, which is imminently—the final project in the Royal Parade link I believe opened last week. So this Council has been able to create a bikeway where you can go on a dedicated recreational link from Keperra to the bay and that's a fantastic thing, and I don't know why the Labor Councillors constantly criticise projects that benefit people and that people enjoy. I also want to talk about the 60 new buses which will reduce the age of our fleet, and continuing the fact that our city has the youngest fleet, and particularly an impressive fleet considering the size of the fleet that is wholly accessible, wholly air-conditioned, and carrying a much larger burden than it was since the Queensland Rail failed—since the people of Brisbane could no longer rely on Queensland Rail to provide services in a reliable and regular way. Our bus system has had to bear the burden of QR’s inability to do their job, but the Brisbane City Council has been in the business of picking up the slack for the State Government for its entire existence. It's something that we've done for a long time, and we'll sure we'll continue to do for many years. I also wanted to just again reiterate my support to Active School Travel. It is a fantastic project. I particularly want to congratulate the legacy officers who are able to continue to get excellent outcomes from local schools, years after the formal program has finished in schools. I know that some schools in my own

area through the legacy program are achieving still well above 50% active travel three or four years after the formal program has concluded. I think that's high praise for those schools, but also high praise for the legacy officers and the quality of the Active School Travel program. Transport for Brisbane is about building a better future for this city. It's not about being locked in the past or being a relic of the past, and I commend it to the Chamber, and I look forward to all Councillors voting for it. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor HOWARD. Councillor HOWARD: Well thank you, Madam Chairman, and I'd like to speak today in support of Program 1, dealing with Transport for Brisbane. I'm sure you will agree with me that time spent in traffic is not well spent, and I know that you, like me, are committed to working hard to reduce traffic congestion, improve local roads and to keep our great city moving. That's why I'm pleased to support the budget initiatives before us today that invests in growing Brisbane's transport networks and services into the future. Madam Chairman, this budget invests in Brisbane's future and builds on our strong record of tackling traffic congestion, delivering Australia's most modern public transport, growing our active transport network, and importantly, commits funding for the landmark Brisbane Metro project, which will reinforce Brisbane's reputation as Australia's New World City. There is a lot in Program 1 that I'm excited about. A lot for Central Ward and a lot of Brisbane as a whole, and for that I would like to thank DEPUTY MAYOR, Adrian SCHRINNER, for his vision and stewardship of the Brisbane Transport portfolio. I would also like to thank the hardworking Council officers within the Brisbane Transport portfolio who are making our vision for a more accessible city a reality. We just heard this morning the DEPUTY MAYOR speak about one of the visionary major improvements to one of our busiest ferry terminals in the city. It's just so important that we continue to invest in New Farm Park's Ferry Terminal. As the Powerhouse gets more patrons, as the ride-sharing becomes cheaper, and as the river will be further opened up by the $43 million investment from the LORD MAYOR for activation, we need to make sure our local infrastructure keeps pace with the increased demand and the push and pull of the changing economy. I want more people to come to the park and the Powerhouse. That is part of our amazing River’s Edge Strategy, but they'll only do so if they can get there easily, safely and conveniently. Ferry terminal upgrades at New Farm Park will achieve just that for the benefit of the entire city, but also importantly for my New Farm commuters and residents. Madam Chairman, today I'd like to touch on a couple of initiatives in the budget that are particularly exciting for my residents in Central Ward. The first initiative I would like to mention is Strategy 1.1.1, which deals with sustainable travel choices, and I'd like to focus on Service 1.1.1.1, which supports our fantastic Active School Travel program. The Active School Travel program provides our local schools and the wider community with the resources needed to change travel behaviours and to reduce local traffic congestion. It works, with schools participating in the program in 2016 reporting a 25% decrease in car trips to school, and more than 80% of parents saying the program had improved their child's road safety awareness. Since starting in 2004, 155 Brisbane schools and over 92,000 students have benefitted from participating in the Active School Travel program, and this year 23,000 students, from 47 schools, will take part in the program. I'm thrilled that two schools in Central Ward—Brisbane Central State School and the Holy Spirit Primary School in New Farm—participate in this program. I'm even more thrilled that earlier this year Holy Spirit School won the coveted Active

School Travel Golden Boot award for having the greatest increase in active school travel, from 29% to 71%. I look forward to working with the schools within Central Ward over the next year to encourage more participation in this worthy program. Madam Chairman, the second initiative I'd like to briefly speak about is covered in Strategy 1.2.5, and is of course the Brisbane Metro. Brisbane Metro is a game-changer for Brisbane. It's a visionary project that addresses Brisbane's inner city bus network congestion issues, and lays the foundation for our city to have a public transport system that is the envy of Australia. Brisbane needs the Brisbane Metro. As we all know, Brisbane is the heart of Australia's fastest-growing region, and with a rapidly increasing population, it is critical that we invest in public transport to maintain our quality of life, support economic growth and keep our city moving. Utilising 21 kilometres of existing busway that links Eight Mile Plains, the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, and the University of Queensland, Brisbane Metro will reduce bus congestion within the inner city allowing residents and visitors to spend less time commuting and more time living. Madam Chairman, Brisbane Metro is even more critical for residents in Herston in my ward now that the State Labor Government has decided to build a 30-storey residential development on the site of the Former Royal Children's Hospital. The redevelopment of the former Children's Hospital site will see hundreds of new residents moving to the already dense Herston area, as well as hundreds, possibly thousands, of new workers who will be competing for valuable street parking, making local congested streets even more difficult for local residents to find a park. With the proposed terminus for the Brisbane Metro located at the Herston busway stop, residents and workers will benefit from high-frequency, ‘turn up and go’ Metro services, alleviating some of the pressures on local streets, and protecting the liveability of the wonderful Herston community. Madam Chairman, this is a budget that gives Brisbane commuters a real choice on how they move around our city. It is a budget that focuses on what is important to the people of Brisbane and commits to protecting our valued lifestyle. It is a budget that supports a strong plan for an even better future. Thank you. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor RICHARDS. Councillor RICHARDS: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak in support of Program 1 – Transport for Brisbane, and in particular the one bikeway reconstruction project and the one footpath reconstruction project for the Pullenvale Ward that shall be received for the 2017-18 financial year budget. I've said it before in this place and I'll say it again—the Pullenvale Ward is 318 square kilometres in size and can fit nine other Brisbane City Council wards within it. It is a ward that is rich in country lifestyle, yet close to the city living that offers so much to all residents of this great city. This budget that was handed down by LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK last Wednesday certainly highlights that this Administration is focused on Brisbane being a great place to live, work and relax, particularly creating lifestyle and leisure opportunities through footpaths and bikeways to enable residents and visitors to easily move around my ward of Pullenvale. For the Pullenvale Ward, being a highly used ward for cyclists, it is great to know that reconstruction works that will occur this coming financial year on the

Regency Place, Advanx Street to Mirbelia Street in Kenmore Hills, is a very much welcomed addition. These works will improve a very old, narrow, extremely uneven and deteriorated footpath from Advanx Street, Kenmore Hills, through behind homes that come out onto the road of Regency Place, Kenmore Hills. Now, this bikeway shared path will continue through the Council-owned greenspace and come out onto Mirbelia Street in Kenmore Hills. This bikeway reconstruction will support the community of Kenmore Hills keeping active and healthy, particularly the children who attend Kenmore State High School, who traverse from Bielby Road through Kenmore Hills using this pathway out to Brookfield Road to attend school. Madam Chairman, the other project I mentioned earlier, being the Kersley Road footpath reconstruction, has been a project that's been needed for some time, to reconstruct the footpath leading to Kenmore South State School. The school, its P&C, and the school children will certainly be very grateful that this footpath will be reconstructed this coming financial year. The other exciting service that is coming to the Pullenvale Ward is the Coot-tha shuttle bus, which will provide a frequent bus loop service connecting key destinations on the mountain. Mt Coot-tha is a key tourist destination, with a number of facilities that are attractive to residents and visitors to Brisbane. Providing easy accessibility to the mountain is considered a key initiative to connect to key destinations on the mountain. The delivery of this shuttle service has been deferred to align with the delivery of the zipline planned for mid-2019, which I also know the mountain biking community are very excited about. This year we have confirmed key bus stop locations to the proposed Coot-tha shuttle bus service to link key destinations like the Summit, JC Slaughter Falls and Simpson Falls picnic areas, the television studios, and Mt Coot-tha Botanic Gardens. These service delivery options are now being investigated. The existing bus stops on Sir Samuel Griffith Drive have been updated to meet DDA requirements, and market sounding for the Coot-tha shuttle bus service was conducted in 2016-17 financial year. In the 2017-18 financial year, detailed planning for shuttle services will be conducted to align with the commencement of zipline operations in mid-2019. So, Madam Chairman, I strongly support this Program 1 – Transport for Brisbane and commend it to the Chamber. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor HUANG.

At that time, 11.29am, the Deputy Chairman, Councillor Vicki HOWARD, assumed the Chair.

Councillor HUANG: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to enter the debate on Program 1 of the 2017-18 Budget on Transport for Brisbane. May I start by commending the LORD MAYOR and this Administration for keeping Brisbane on the right track by investing so heavily in this city's public and active transport. It will keep this city moving in such a robust pace to future-proof this city's economic prosperity and liveability. We all acknowledge the importance of public transport to Brisbane, but the main difference between the Administration and the Opposition is the courage and the vision for this city. Madam Chair, this budget laid out a public transport vision for this city to grow and be competitive to the future challenges of population growth, which will see significant increases in people's movements across this city for working,

studying or simply enjoying the leisure and lifestyle opportunities this city has to offer. Brisbane ratepayers are doing more than their fair share by contributing $123 million towards public transport operating subsidies, and that is something covered by the state governments throughout Australia. We do that to ensure this city has a more affordable, reliable and quality public transport system, that will give our residents additional quality time to spent with their friends, colleagues and families, instead of sitting in traffic waiting. According to the latest news release from TransLink—it says QR will operate reduced train services over the 2017 winter school holiday period. No wonder 68% of Brisbane public transport users choose bus over train. Madam Chair, before I became a Councillor I had to travel frequently for my business, and can I say judging by the world standards, Brisbane has the best bus and ferry services in the world, considering our population and land mass. We have over 1,200, 100% air-conditioned low floor buses with an average life of around seven years. That is the youngest bus fleet in Australia. Well, according to Councillor CASSIDY, that bus number is inadequate for Brisbane commuters. I think it must be difficult for Councillor CASSIDY, who has never been living a life other than politics, to understand anything other than politicking. There's something called law of equilibrium in economics, which means when supply equals demand for a product. That is exactly what this Administration is doing. If Councillor CASSIDY can understand, he should have praised this Administration's superior management in making that balance for our bus services, but of course we can't expect Councillor CASSIDY to know anything more than politicking. Back to our public transport. Further to the comfort and reliability our bus fleet brings to our commuters, the 60 new buses that will join our bus fleet in the coming financial year will have USB charging stations on-board to enable our commuters to put their minds at ease knowing they won't be disconnected from the world if their phones are running low or out of battery. For students, the new 2.5 ampere charging station can also charge their tablets, should they need to finish their homework on the bus or study further before exams—that's probably something that shouldn't be encouraged. But, Madam Chair, this Council is continuing to strive to look after the best interests of our residents and make sure we keep enjoying the quality public transport that is the envy of the world. Talking of world-class public transport, I would like to congratulate and commend this Administration for the release of the Brisbane Metro Business Case and the continual budget commitment in advancing this project. Brisbane Metro will offer commuters one of the best servicing, mass rapid transit systems in the world. It's high-frequency, it's time-saving, and it's the most comfortable public transport mode that is servicing the modern cities around the world. There's no need to question whether we need a Metro or light rail—it's all nonsensical politicking. You don't have to travel to New York during a Council debate, like Councillor SUTTON did a few years ago, to understand the value and the importance of a massive rapid transit system is to a modern city. All we have to do is just Google online and you'll find out—to find out— Councillor interjecting. Deputy Chairman: Just a moment please, Councillor HUANG. Councillor SUTTON! Councillor SUTTON, thank you. Councillor HUANG, please continue.

Councillor HUANG: All we have to do is just Google online to find out the capacity, the speed and the environmental benefits Metro will bring to a city. Then you know Brisbane residents have made the right decision in electing this Administration back to office to keep Brisbane on the right track. Madam Chair, during last Friday's info session I did ask the DEPUTY MAYOR a question on the Metro depot, because there are two designated Metro stations that will fall within Macgregor Ward, and they are Upper Mount Gravatt and Eight Mile Plains. Eight Mile Plains will be one of the terminus stations that is likely to be a considered destination for a Metro depot, so I did some research on the impacts of having a Metro station. I've compared metro systems in Europe, America and Asia, and there are a number of common benefits a metro station can bring to the local area. Firstly, it is likely to increase land value. It is obvious that a mass rapid transit system provides all kinds of benefits—reduced time and stress for commuters, cleaner air, and more walkable neighbourhoods. All that can be translated into dollars and factored into property values. Secondly, it will help foster a sense of community. Metro stations often become the centre of an area. An increase of the retail activity and the common bond developing through daily commuting often creates friendships amongst strangers, and fostering a new sense of community. Madam Chair, I can keep going on with other benefits, such as lower carbon emissions, eco-friendly and better accessibility and many more. I think Councillor SRI has underestimated the advancement in the new technology. You don't need tracks to be electric powered—I'm sure Metro is better and greener than you think. But all these benefits wouldn’t happen without the vision and leadership of our LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK. I'm proud and honoured to be a part of the QUIRK Administration in delivering this infrastructure of the century, that is going to totally reshape the public transport usage of this city. I would like to close by thanking DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor SCHRINNER, and his officers for their diligent work in delivering the Metro business case, and I look forward to seeing Brisbane Metro progress with the budget. I commend Program 1 to the Chamber. Deputy Chairman: Further debate? Councillor OWEN. Councillor OWEN: Thank you, Madam Deputy Chairman. It with great pleasure that I rise in this Chamber to support Program 1 – Transport for Brisbane, and I do commend the DEPUTY MAYOR on his commitment over the years for our transport providers throughout Brisbane, and also making sure that we do provide a service that is of world-class quality. It would be remiss if I didn't commence by thanking the LORD MAYOR and the Chairman of Finance for the commitment in this budget to the recommendations for the AusSafe bus safety review and their dedication to making sure that we do what we can to support our bus drivers, particularly in light of the tragic circumstances of last year. Madam Deputy Chairman, I rise today to raise a very critical issue and this is in respect to Service 1.2.3.1 Plan for Public Transport, and I quote from the budget document, ‘Council will work with strategic stakeholders in the development and optimisation of the public transport network’, and further, ‘Council will continue to work proactively with TransLink and the Queensland Government to achieve the best outcomes possible for Brisbane's public transport customers and ratepayers’. Let me repeat that last bit—‘to achieve the best outcomes possible for Brisbane's public transport customers and ratepayers’.

What we have at the moment is a very critical issue for the 130 bus service, and I would like to raise in this Chamber the fact that I have a document which states to TransLink, ‘I am writing to request that TransLink remove current bus transit services from using the Stretton State College Illaweena Campus senior school car park’. I will further say that this—and I quote from this document, ‘I am notifying the relevant parties that this decision has been made by the Department of Education and Training’. Madam Deputy Chairman, how on earth are we supposed to work with a State Government where the departments are battling each other. We cannot have a solid public transport system that serves our residents and our ratepayers and our students of our schools, if one State Government department is making a decision which impacts another, and they cannot get agreement. We are in a situation where our public transport services that support our residents and our ratepayers and our local students—particularly those local students that travel from the Algester State electorate on the 130 bus service into the Stretton State electorate—those students are going to be disadvantaged, because if these buses are stopped from stopping at that car park it is going to cause a lot of problems. Now there was a TransLink proposal which came out in 2011, when the now Premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, was Minister for Transport. Can I say that that TransLink proposal will work in this location. There is potential for a win-win— win-win. There is the potential to get the buses out of the school car park if the TransLink proposal to locate the turnaround facility on Illaweena Street takes a little bit of school oval. So the Department of Education and Training has got to contribute a little bit of land on the edge of our road reserve to allow that to turn around. Now Premier Palaszczuk when she was Minister was going through looking at a number of park ‘n’ ride options in that area. There was another one that taken off the agenda as a result of her efforts as Minister, because it was in the right interests of the residents. I know that if this is looked at carefully by the senior Members of Cabinet, Minister Bailey will see that any alternatives will result in severe congestion, resulting in major delays in the transport system, and also major millions of dollars in costs. Minister Enoch will see that there is a disadvantage to her residents and the students that go to Stretton College, and certainly I'm sure Minister Trad will see the common sense in putting this infrastructure in the right place. Now certainly with all of our schools, we do know that there are issues when we have conflicts between public transport and parking, and certainly in this document as well it is requested that that school wants to take back control of a Brisbane City Council car park. I'm certain that with some proper negotiation processes and some sensible discussion around this there can potentially be consideration of doing a little bit of a land swap, so that we can get the right outcome for the residents and the ratepayers. The other win for this is that the residents of the retirement community living on Illaweena Street will then be able to have use of the bus stop immediately out the front of their retirement community, which was conditioned as part of their development. So, Madam Deputy Chairman, there are a lot of things that the State Government departments need to sort out, and I for one would like them to get their act together so that we can work with them to ensure we have continuity of that 130 bus service. Why is that bus service important? Because it is one of the top 10 bus routes in our city. It is one of the most utilised bus services because residents in that particular area don't have access directly to a train station. I will take Councillor STRUNK's comments to say that we do need to work with the State Government with respect to public transport, but at the same time the State Government has to work between its departments together to get the right

outcome here. That is what is called being responsive to the needs of residents in the suburbs. Madam Deputy Chairman, I just would like also to correct Councillor GRIFFITHS when he made reference to Pallara as being predominantly an industrial area. It is very much a rural residential area and an emerging community area. I would also like to say that potentially down the track—and DEPUTY MAYOR I would like to put this on the agenda—I know how valued the Metro is for the southside, but down the track I would like to see that potentially if the services are expanding, that there may be some connectivity further down on that southside, and looking at ways that we can possibly do a reverse flow with that 130 bus to connect up with the Eight Mile Plains Metro depot so we can speed up the connections for the residents that live in those outer suburbs. That in itself will help ease the congestion along the entire Mains Road corridor. I know Councillor HUANG and I, we travel that corridor regularly and it is very congested, and if there is any way that we can free up some of those services and look at alternative routes that can connect with a faster service for our residents, we would certainly be supportive of it. In conclusion, Madam Deputy Chairman, I would just like to say as well a very specific thank you for the Ward Park Footpath and Parks Trust Fund. This is something that I myself have ensured has a complement between footpath and also park upgrades, and this has been very beneficial because it allows all of us as Councillors to be responsive to our local community needs, and to get things done without having to wait for the budget cycle. I commend this program to the Chamber. Deputy Chairman: Further debate? DEPUTY MAYOR, please close the debate. DEPUTY MAYOR: Thank you, Madam Deputy Chair.

At that time, 11.44am, the Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN, resumed the Chair.

DEPUTY MAYOR: Look it's interesting—when you're the Chair of a particular program or portfolio and you're heading into budget time, I must admit we all as Chairs have a little bit of apprehension and there's some nerves there associated with, well, what is going to come out? What attacks are going to be levelled against us? What might we need to respond to in the budget debate? That's a normal human reaction to have when you're responsible for the carriage of a major program like this. But I have to say it is pretty clear from what we've heard today that Labor's got absolutely nothing—absolutely nothing. I've got reams of notes here ready to answer criticisms or questions or concerns—most of them are untouched actually. The reality is Labor has taken the lazy road and the easy route, which is simply opposition for opposition's sake and making stuff up—making stuff up. If in doubt, make it up. That's the Labor way. Now, we're all aware of an infamous propaganda expert in the Second World War who talked about the ‘big lie’, and he accused the English of being liars. He said that the English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and one should stick to that lie, and they need to keep to their lies even at the risk of looking ridiculous. That seems to be the approach that Labor is taking, because their position on Metro is just ridiculous. It is ridiculous. Now, let me tell you exactly what Labor thinks about Metro. There were a few interesting comments made about Metro from some of the Labor Councillors— they let it slip. Councillor GRIFFITHS said he thought that Metro was common sense. He said it was common sense. Councillor STRUNK said he thought that some of the

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 122 changes we'd made for Metro, including going to UQ, were positive. So they know begrudgingly that this is a sensible and good project, and it is change for the better. They know it. But what they really wanted is for us to screw it up. They wanted for us to stuff it up so that they could politically capitalise on that stuff-up. That's what they wanted. Now, Councillor CUMMING broadcast his desire in September last year and he went off a little bit half-cocked, but in September last year he put a Tweet up saying #Metroisdead—Metro is dead. That's what Labor wants. They want to kill Metro. They want Metro to fail. They want to deny the people of Brisbane the opportunity for better public transport, because they want to make a political point. They want to score political points so they would like to see Metro die so that they can benefit politically. That is disgraceful, Madam Chairman. That is disgraceful, lazy and dishonest. They should be wanting the best possible project for Brisbane. They should be wanting to put party politics aside and get the best outcome. And I have to say the only person on the other side that actually seems to want that is Councillor SRI. He doesn't always get it right, and I'm sure he'll claim that we don't always get it right, but he seems to genuinely want a good public transport outcome, and that's what we want too. Labor wants Metro to fail, and because it hasn't failed, and because we're proceeding ahead with this project and putting our money where our mouth is, they just don't like it. They don't like it and they're all over the place on this project. They say things like—Councillor STRUNK said, ‘oh it used to be a rail project but now it's a bus project’. Well my memory must be not serving me correctly because I remember a certain failed Labor candidate—a failed Lord Mayoral candidate—saying it was never a rail project, it was a fancy bus project. He said that about the original Metro. So even when it was a rail project, no, head in the sand, they stuck to their political line, the ‘big lie’, and even if it makes them look ridiculous, keep pushing that message. Now the project has changed and we've been absolutely upfront with the community, and with all Councillors in this Chamber, that it has changed significantly, but guess how it's changed? It's changed for the better and it's changed because we listen to the community and we listen to the industry and we listen to the transport experts. We listened. Labor would prefer that we didn't listen. Labor would prefer that we stick to another project, which may not have got off the ground, so they could score political points, and that's just not okay. It is not a productive way of approaching major public transport decisions, and I think it's quite clear today that their approach has been exposed for what it is, which is simply making stuff up, telling the ‘big lie’ and opposition for opposition sake. Now some of the—I've taken notes about what every Councillor said, and I probably won't be able to get through all of it, but some of the interesting things that came out of the comments were comments for example about bus numbers. Now the claim that Labor made, both in Councillor CUMMING's speech the other day and also today, was that we've got less buses now than we did a few years ago. I explained this very clearly in the Information Session. The number of buses that we actually have sitting at our depots depends on what demand there is for public transport services. Now it would be a very irresponsible operator to keep buying buses and expanding the fleet when they were sitting on the tarmac not doing anything. That's the approach that Labor is advocating. They're saying don't retire any buses, just keep buying more. We don't care if they sit there at the depot idle gathering cobwebs. We don't care—just buy more. No serious operator, either public or private, would take that type of approach. Can you imagine if Qantas just kept on buying planes and they sat there in the airport not flying. This is ridiculous. We are investing in the renewal of the fleet, and if we're not expanding the fleet then we're renewing it, and both things are really important for the public.

Having new modern buses, wheelchair accessible and air-conditioned, is really important for the travelling public, and so fleet renewal is just as important right now as any kind of expansion. So that's what we're focusing on. When we need to put in extra services with TransLink approval and TransLink support to cope with extra patronage that's coming online, we will do so. We will happily do so. We will grow the fleet. We have grown the fleet significantly in the past, from around 700 buses, from memory, when we first came into Administration, to now 1,224 buses. So any kind of suggestion that we haven't grown the fleet is ridiculous, and Labor's approach on this issue is ridiculous as well. The other issue that they've said about Metro, which needs to be slapped down, is the idea that it's just a bus project or this project somehow is just about vehicles. If we put a few new vehicles on the busway, then that's a Metro. Only 20% of the cost of Metro is about the vehicles or the depot for the vehicles. The other 80% is actually about building stuff. It's about building infrastructure. It's about dealing with bottlenecks. It's about delivering travel time savings. It's about improving the State Government's busway network and improving the assets, and making sure there is a fully segregated route. That's what this project is about, and anyone that suggests that it's only about the vehicle that is used is ignorant of the facts. There's been a few comments made about cycling, and Councillor CUMMING talked about how our bikeways are too expensive. Pot calling the kettle black. In the last election—and we heard this repeated today—Labor promised $130 million for bikeways over the term, but in the fine print $90 million of that $130 million was for the Kangaroo Point pedestrian bridge. So that leaves $40 million left for other bikeways—$40 million. So that is actually a massive reduction in the bikeway spend compared to what we're delivering now. Now we said very honestly we're going to commit $100 million into bikeways, and on top of that we're going to build a new shared path along Kingsford Smith Drive. We're going to build new bike lanes and shared paths and separated paths along other major roads projects like Telegraph Road, and there's a whole heap of projects we're doing—Wynnum Road separated bike path. So that's on top of the $100 million, yet Labor tries to con cyclists by saying, ‘oh look we're going to spend $30 million more than the Libs’, but really they're actually spending less. They would have spent less. Now the Kangaroo Point pedestrian bridge was also undercooked in their figures as well. Ninety million is probably undercooked. This bridge could cost up to $120 million, which would take almost their entire budget that they've set aside. So if they allocated $130 million for bikeways, maybe up to $120 million could have been taken for the Kangaroo Point bridge—one project. Now the Kangaroo Point bridge is 400 metres approximately long— $120 million, 400 metres of bike path. That's the most expensive bike path in the world, and they sit here and they criticise what we've been investing in. The LORD MAYOR hit the nail on the head when he said that the easy routes have been done, the cheap routes have been done, and these routes and bikeway connections are becoming more and more expensive because they're difficult. They involve land resumption. They involve a whole heap of disruption, but they need to be done and we're getting on with it, Madam Chairman, and that's our record and that's what we will continue doing. Chairman: Thank you DEPUTY MAYOR. As there's no further debate, I will put the motion for the adoption of the Transport for Brisbane program.

Motion put: The Chairman submitted to the Chamber the motion for the adoption of the Transport for Brisbane Program and it was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillor Andrew WINES, and Councillor Krista ADAMS immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.

The voting was as follows:

AYES: 23 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Andrew WINES, Norm WYNDHAM, and the Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK, and Shayne SUTTON.

NOES: 1 - Councillor Jonathan SRI.

The Chairman then called upon Councillor Amanda COOPER to present the Infrastructure for Brisbane Program.

2. INFRASTRUCTURE FOR BRISBANE PROGRAM: 650/2016-17 Councillor Amanda COOPER, Chairman of the Infrastructure Committee moved, seconded by Councillor Fiona KING, that for the services of the Council, the allocations for the Operations and the Projects for the year 2017-18 and the Rolling Projects for the Infrastructure for Brisbane Program as contained on pages 24 to 37 and the indicative schedules on pages 152 to 172 so far as they relate to Program 2, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor COOPER. Councillor COOPER: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm a little surprised to see that the Australian Labor Party supported Program 1, so the challenge is on to see if they'll support Program 2, and if they don't I will be extremely disappointed now. So I'm hoping for the very best, because I personally think—and I know I'm biased—Program 2 is delivering the very best for the people of Brisbane. So I am very proud to be able to speak to this Program, Infrastructure for Brisbane. The goal of this program is I think very clear to all of us. It is to make sure we enable the efficient and sustainable movement of people, freight and services, to make sure we build smoother streets, and to make sure we continue our battle against traffic congestion. There has been a recently released document that was produced jointly by Brisbane City Council and the State Government which is called Connecting Brisbane. It absolutely highlighted how critical this battle is for Brisbane City Council to continue on. So it talked about the prediction from Infrastructure Australia and the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics, that by 2030 road congestion would cost our city up to $6 billion, and for South East Queensland that could be $9 billion if we don't continue to deal with traffic congestion. It also noted—and I know my Committee know this absolutely—that 42% of people working in Brisbane are actually commuting from outside our local government area. So we do face significant growth on the road network that is not of our making. That is of other residents from other local governments who are out travelling on Brisbane City Council roads. We also know that we are growing. Our city is growing and our region is growing and the State itself. I know that Councillor CUMMING is absolutely passionately committed to delivering great outcomes for his local residents, and I would be disappointed if he didn't note that the growth that we're experiencing means we have to continue to deliver important infrastructure.

Of course this particular budget is an infrastructure budget, with $1 billion, so effectively about a third of the total budget, is about investing in our road network through the resurfacing of 650 streets, 39 major road projects and over 250 minor projects that are going to be delivered as a consequence of this budget. This is about making sure that our residents and our visitors can move around the city. To make sure they can move around our city safely. To make sure that we improve the facilities around our local schools. To encourage opportunities for business investment. To ensure the prosperity and growth of our city. To make sure that freight, in particular, moves very safely and efficiently through our streets, connecting with TradeCoast, the port, the airport, and indeed to all of the locations in our city where we're experiencing these sorts of opportunities. Council of course, through the TransApex plan—so our history is a very strong one—we have delivered more than $7 billion worth of major infrastructure, so the largest combination of major infrastructure projects ever initiated by a local council in Australia. I really want to pay absolute tribute to this LORD MAYOR, because he is a man, who when he makes a commitment, delivers on that commitment, and I think the TransApex plan was absolutely something he's been very, very passionate about in this place. So we have been able to deliver Legacy Way, CLEM7, the Go Between Bridge, and the Eleanor Schonell Bridge—all essential road infrastructure and investment in our city's future. We, of course, are responsible for more than 5,700 kilometres of road, which equates to—and I know Councillor STRUNK was interested to hear—that equates to 15,241 streets, in comparison to the State Government's responsibility for just over 300 kilometres of roads. So we carry the absolute burden of ensuring that we get it right when it comes to dealing with traffic and the movement that we all make through and around our city. We, of course, are going to be preparing a new transport plan, so the Transport Plan for Brisbane is about outlining how our city intends to address the transport challenges over the next 20 years and beyond, because we of course must always think about the future and how we are planning for it right now. So this is why it is so critical that each and every year we get on with delivering projects to tackle traffic congestion. This coming financial year we'll be meeting major milestones, in particular in relation to safety and congestion issues. So we've got works to start on $127 million upgrading of Wynnum Road corridor, so we've got both Stage 1 and Stage 1b that will be occurring concurrently. We've got the four-laning of the Inner City Bypass (ICB), which is well underway to upgrade this absolutely essential connection in our road network, because we know when there's a problem with the Inner City Bypass it pretty much shuts down all traffic on the northside of Brisbane. In particular, when we look at it right now, it is operating at 90% capacity and will be severely over capacity if we don't do anything by 2021. When you look at those vehicles, it's currently carrying about 100,000 vehicles in the peak each and every day. This certainly has a tremendous impact on our road network, and in fact it impacts on our public transport network, and Legacy Way itself has delivered significant opportunities for bus users in the western suburbs. I know that since the opening of Legacy Way, bus users have experienced average journey time savings of up to 13 minutes, and we've seen a 40% patronage increase on inbound bus services. Certainly with our new connection, that we're going to be able to deliver a bus ramp that will allow bus users not only to travel inbound and get that kind of journey time savings, we'll see them be able to do that on the outbound trip. I know that the local Councillors from the western suburbs are very passionate about making sure that they get improved facilities for their local residents, and I think this project delivers on all counts.

In relation to other work that we're undertaking, we're continuing our investment on the $650 million upgrade to our city's key gateway, Kingsford Smith Drive. So we will be undertaking $223 million worth of investment in this financial year. This upgrade will deliver not just a road upgrade, it will deliver opportunities for better public transport. I know Councillor SCHRINNER is very excited about the future opportunities that we'll deliver for him to make sure that we improve public transport, noting 15,000 new residents who have moved into Hamilton Northshore without, unfortunately, the State Government investing in infrastructure upgrades to provide public transport outcomes for those particular residents. They are forced to travel on our roads, and our roads are experiencing significant congestion as a result. So we'll be delivering a fantastic upgrade. It includes seven kilometres of new and improved pedestrian and cycle paths. It will deliver a brand new Riverwalk, and a public pontoon. It'll create not only a roadway; it will also create new opportunities for people to have the ability to have leisure and lifestyle opportunities. So they will actually be able to enjoy this location. They'll be able to walk, cycle and in fact spend some time looking at our beautiful city, because it's undoubtedly one of the most spectacular showcases of Brisbane. We're also continuing—and I know I'm personally very excited about this one— we are spending $250 million on the Telegraph Road corridor upgrade. We delivered the Open Level Crossing Elimination program, and since then we have not faulted, Madam Chair. We have delivered Stage 1a. We are currently working on Stage 1b and we will be delivering Stage 2. So this will connect this whole road corridor, and we are extremely keen to see the State Government come to the party and deliver the Linkfield Road connection, which still does cause problems for the local community, and we know that this is a really important piece connecting Brendale all the way through to the Gateway. I also would particularly like to say that this project has been supported by the Federal Government, the Stage 1b component, and I'd particularly like to thank them, specifically for their support and investment in our city. Not only are they investing in this particular project in Telegraph Road corridor, we've also seen support from them for the Green Camp Road corridor. I think that this is going to be another opportunity to transform a road corridor that experiences congestion, and we have particularly seen, when we look at the recorded crashes from WebCrash data between 2009 and 2014, 25 crashes within the project area. We had 20 crashes at Green Camp Road/Tilley Road intersection, four crashes at the Green Camp Road and Rickertt Road intersection, and one crash between Tilley Road and Manly Road. This particular upgrade will be a great opportunity to improve safety and travel times, increase capacity to accommodate existing and future traffic demands, including Rickertt Road and Tilley Road intersections, and particularly it will make significant improvements to the road flood immunity. I know that the local Councillors—so both Councillor SCHRINNER and Councillor MURPHY—are extremely excited about this opportunity. They have been working very closely, of course, with their Federal Members in relation to this particular project. I would like to again thank the LORD MAYOR for being a visionary about seeing an opportunity here to deliver even more than we actually had committed to, and I'd like to particularly thank the Federal Government for supporting this project. It is what we would really like to see going into the future, this great partnership between levels of government. We've also got opportunities for Geebung residents to benefit from this budget through the upgrade of the Murphy Road and Ellison Road roundabout. Councillor KING and I know this intersection or this roundabout very, very well. It has been a challenge, and we are absolutely getting on with delivering

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 127 this project, and she has been going through all of the challenges. This of course will require some land resumptions, and all of us in the Chamber know that that can be very difficult, and something that we have to work sensitively through with the community to progress. We're also going to be undertaking—and we're working with Logan Council to undertake a major upgrade to the Johnson Road/Stapylton Road intersection at Heathwood. I know, Madam Chair, you are very, very excited to see this progress, so this is something that I think will again be a great opportunity to transform the functionality of that particular location. We've got work on the Beckett and Hamilton Road intersection, one that the local Councillor again is excited to see. So there's a huge range of projects that this budget includes. I don't think there is any Councillor in this Chamber, who if they vote against Program 2, will be voting against their own interests of their residents, because this delivers an absolute swag of projects that will benefit the residents of Brisbane. This really does clearly demonstrate our genuine commitment to delivering improvements. If you look again so in terms of higher-level projects, we've got a range of other projects in the 2017-18 financial year that deliver low-cost, high-impact solutions. So we've got the Arterial Road Program. So if you look in the budget, pages 54, 55, 56, this has a list of a whole range of different initiatives that we'll be delivering. So, particularly it is provision and extension of turn lanes, intersection upgrades, management of road space allocation, and signs and lines allocations. These projects are absolutely about focusing on getting more out of the current network, and making sure it works as well as it possibly can, with minor changes that can be big game-changers in terms of its functionality. We have identified these projects through a range of different means. We do observation of the network operations. We collect travel data from our traffic signals and Bluetooth detectors. So the projects are absolutely about targeting and dealing with congestion and improving travel time and improving safety. We're also funding the travel closed circuit television infrastructure so that's the installation of additional cameras at specific locations, on pages 155 and 156. This will provide additional coverage of the road network to monitor, detect and enable direct action by the congestion reduction traffic engineers and BMTMC (Brisbane Metropolitan Transport Management Centre) operators, where they can actually make changes to how the intersection or how the network is functioning in the case of an emergency, or in case of unexpected congestion, and allowing the ability to flush traffic or utilise different means to get the traffic flowing better. We are also investing over $280,000 in Bluetooth infrastructure, so this is the way of the future. Making sure that we are observing the road network and making sure that we can collect data, manage that data and include that data, particularly for our Open Data portal for people who are interested in providing new additional apps. But it is absolutely critical that we continue to maintain that data that we use to plan our network. We are also delivering nearly $3 million for safety upgrades around schools, safety awareness programs, and I am absolutely keen to continue the work that Council's been doing with more than 300 schools, making sure that we continue to explore ways to improve school safety, including the traffic management plans. This Chamber has heard me talk about traffic management plans on multiple occasions and I will not resile from that. It is something that is critical. We have over 300 physical schools in our city with nearly 118,000 students enrolled. These 300 physical schools sometimes actually make up a number of schools that are co-located. So there's a lot of opportunities for us to improve the way the interaction is between our schools and the road network around them. We've also continued on our work as a part of the Lord Mayor's Parking Taskforce, so this was a specific outcome to have traffic management plans

prepared for schools around our city. This is something that we will be very much focused on in the coming financial year. We'll also continue to rollout our very successful high visibility warning signage, with this budget investing nearly $2 million for speed warning and flashing warning signs programs. So the portable speed warning signs have been incredibly successful, with over 100 million vehicles utilising them since the program started. I thank the LORD MAYOR for his kindness to continue these important programs for our city. Thank you, Madam Chair. Chairman: Thank you, Councillor COOPER. Further debate? Councillor SUTTON. Councillor SUTTON: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on the Infrastructure for Brisbane Program, Program 2 in the budget. So I guess, true to form, there was more spin than substance when the LORD MAYOR released his budget last week, claiming that there was more than $1 billion in infrastructure funding, because that claim only stood as long as the first question in the Budget Information Sessions, when the budget fine print revealed that that $1 billion infrastructure spend included $185.4 million in carryovers. So not new money—money for projects that were promised in the current financial year, that the LNP has failed to spend. So almost one fifth—almost one fifth of the infrastructure spend this year is old money that they didn't spend on projects in the current financial year. So if they can't spend this year's allocation, I don't know why they think they're actually going to spend everything next year, because don't look at what they say, Madam Chair, look at what they do. What they do is a record and a legacy of carryover, after carryover, after carryover each year. I know the LORD MAYOR's a betting man so I'm happy to offer a wager here today. I'm happy to put a hundred bucks on the table to say that if this time next year when we're debating this budget, at least 20% of the infrastructure spend that he's put in place for this financial year hasn't been carried over to either the 2018-19 year or beyond, I'd be happy to part with that hundred bucks. But I tend to say—there you go, he's got some motivation now—I can see him grinning—Madam Chair, I have every confidence that just as we are seeing this year, there is no way in the world this Administration is going to live up to their promise or their claim to Brisbane residents that they'll be spending $1 billion on infrastructure. That was not the case last year. It is not going to be the case this year—$185 million in this year's budget to make up that $1 billion spend is actually carryover. I was interested to learn in this budget that the Administration is getting ready and preparing a new Transport Plan for Brisbane. All I can say on that, Madam Chair, is that I hope they do a better job on this one than they did on the last one, because you might recall that they had remapped the city when they last brought a transport plan to this Council. They had Wolston Road on Brisbane's south, it had been moved to the northside, and they had Scrub Road at Carindale—it was on the north shore of the river near Hamilton, and Coronation Drive had shifted from the westside to the eastside, and even the TransApex projects—even the TransApex projects where we had the CLEM7—it was going down Hawthorne Road at Hawthorne, and we had the Northern Link Tunnel—well it was actually located along Old Cleveland Road going all the way out to Carina. Councillor BOURKE's looking all confused, but Councillor BOURKE, I've still got my copy here. Remember all these lovely glossy brochures that you got printed to promote your new transport plans, and then they had to be pulped because you got the map wrong.

So, Madam Chair, I just hope—Councillor QUIRK was in charge last time, but I note that Councillor COOPER's going to be in charge of that this year. I have every confidence that she'll do a better job. I don't know why she's not in the running for LORD MAYOR quite frankly, but I have every confidence that Councillor COOPER will do a better job, because when Graham QUIRK’s left in charge that's the type of thing—when Councillor Graham QUIRK’s left in charge that's the type of mistakes you see coming forward to this Chamber as part of the new transport plan. So we wait with baited breath to see what that looks like when it gets delivered in the next 12 months. Obviously Labor Councillors are on record supporting the funding allocation for the Wynnum Road upgrade, both Stage 1 and Stage 2, but just on the Wynnum Road upgrade—going back to the current transport plan—I do see here there is that notation—Wynnum Road from Shafston Avenue to Hawthorne Road does clearly say that that will be finished by 2012 under the current transport plan. Here we are in 2017, and we haven't even turned to sod yet, and there's a whole range of projects—I haven't got time to go through it, but I do look forward to debating that transport plan when it comes forward into this place in the next 12 months, because we'll have plenty to go on in terms of their record of delivery under the current transport plan. So the Wynnum Road upgrade—we are though, happy for the funding allocation. We do know that 56,000 vehicles are using this corridor each day, and peak hour travel times as slow as 25 kilometres per hour, and we also believe that this is a much needed project. It will be eight years overdue when it finally opens, and in addition to the transport plan, we all remember that road action plan where both Wynnum Road and Kingsford Smith Drive were both going to be finished by 2012, but we're still waiting in traffic for that to come, but I'm glad we're finally starting to get on with it. Kingsford Smith Drive—we've said many times before that we believe the design of the Kingsford Smith Drive project is excessive—$650 million is an enormous amount of money to spend when the travel time saving is just one minute. Labor Councillors believe that rather than gold-plating Kingsford Smith Drive, a Labor Council would have pursued a lesser project and spread the funding across the city. Our project proposal that we took to the election would have seen the same improvement in travel times but we would have had funding to spread more money across the city to fix the litany of suburban bottlenecks that this Administration has ignored for far too long. Turning to Enhanced Parking and Management, Service 2.2.1.1, we note the revenue breakdown there for parking management in the city includes $9.792 million in revenue from the King George Square and Wickham Terrace car parks, and $21.32 million in revenue from the parking meters. I just stop on the parking meters for a moment, because LORD MAYOR QUIRK got up before and said, ‘oh the Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund is funded from the parking meter revenue’. Well, Madam Chair, $21.32 million divided by 26 wards is around about $800,000 not $398,000, so I think there's a bit of a shortfall there when it comes to that claim that parking meter revenue is hypothecated to the Ward Parks and Footpaths Trust Fund. That's clearly not the case, otherwise each local Councillor would have almost double the amount to spend in their wards each year, which would actually solve my problem quite nicely. I would like to ask the LORD MAYOR to actually consider putting truth behind his claim that parking meter revenue is hypothecated to parks and footpaths across the city. The LNP—also we noted in the budget questioning that the LNP are also expecting an additional $1 million in revenue due to, ‘improved technology

enabling better parking enforcement, with a special focus being given to people who overstay their time limits’. So the days of Council allowing a couple of minutes' grace for those people doing the mad dash back to their parking meters to either put some more money in the meter or get out just in time, because through no fault of their own something has taken slightly longer than they anticipated— Councillors interjecting. Councillor SUTTON: Pardon? Councillors interjecting. Councillor SUTTON: Well there you go, Councillor SIMMONDS, but this Administration will get you the second your parking meter expires. So this money is an addition to the parking fine revenue target, and it shows that the LNP still really do hold true to their philosophy that Brisbane streets are paved with gold—gold that is gauged from the pockets of everyday Brisbane residents in any way they can possibly get at it. At the parking meters, and then if you're 30 seconds late via a parking fine if you're overstaying your time limit. Madam Chair, there are other projects— Chairman: Councillor SUTTON your time has expired. Councillor MURPHY. Councillor MURPHY: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. It gives me great pleasure to rise to speak on Program 2 – Infrastructure for Brisbane. This is our biggest program— $1 billion of expenditure, and rightfully so. As Councillor SCHRINNER said before, and as Councillor COOPER said, this Administration is all about mobility. We are about you being able to move as quickly and as efficiently around this city as possible, in whatever mode that you choose, which means we're platform-agnostic. So whether you drive a car, whether you catch a bus, whether you board a ferry or maybe even a CityCat, whether you ride our highly successful CityCycle scheme, Madam Chairman— which is highly successful by the way—the 2017-18 Budget gives you something to ride on. It's dedicated to tackling traffic congestion and ensuring that our residents can get home quicker and safer, and as the LORD MAYOR said in this budget speech, and spend more time doing the things that really matter. It gets on with the job of constructing important major projects for the city, as well as the minor ones that help our residents move about the suburbs. There's 39 major projects funded in this budget, 250 minor projects and 650 roads resurfaced, which is a new record for Brisbane City Council. Now I want to talk about some of the major projects before getting stuck into the local ones within my ward. There's Wynnum Road corridor Stage 1. Now, Madam Chairman, we know that the Wynnum Road corridor has been chronically neglected by Labor in the past, and it's this Administration—and look it may have something to do with the fact that they were always safe Labor seats down in that area, and there was no need that previous mayors have seen to spend money down there—but this Administration has delivered for those residents. As we have gone and collected more and more seats in the eastern suburbs, as they have seen the spending that we have made there. It is very well placed in speeding up one of the city's slowest-moving corridors. Now residents in my ward were not fooled at the last election by Councillor SUTTON and her signs saying, ‘we'll fast-track the Wynnum Road upgrade’. They know that only this Administration will deliver the roads. They can trust Labor to talk about delivering roads, just in the same way that they've trusted Labor to talk about Cross River Rail, and spend money on sending glossy brochures out to Currumbin, and Facebook advertising videos, but they can actually trust the LNP to deliver these projects on the ground.

We have the ICB four-laning, Madam Chairman, and Councillor SUTTON said ‘oh, there's carryovers—they said they would spend this last year, they didn't spend it this year’. Well last year we had in the budget $80 million for the ICB four-laning and this year—what is it this year—it's down to $9 million. Why would that be do you think? Why would that be? Oh, because we did a deal with Transurban to get that road for $9 million rather than $80 million, and apparently that's a bad deal. That's a bad deal. Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor MURPHY: Okay. Well—okay, well, Madam Chairman— Chairman: Order! Thank you. Councillor MURPHY: Madam Chairman, forgive me for saying that that is a good deal. This Administration does great deals for the city, and we are very proud to have delivered that massive savings and upgrading the ICB at a very minimal cost for Brisbane residents. Kingsford Smith Drive upgrade—they have criticised that. There's $223 million loaded in the budget for this project in this financial year. Well this is a major link to the Australia TradeCoast. It is one of the city's most important roads, and as anyone who's travelled internationally would know, sometimes you don't spend that long in a city. Sometimes the only road you get to see is the road on the way from the airport to the city. At the moment, visitors to Brisbane get off at the airport and they drive in via the ICB if they're not taking the Airport Link tunnel, and they are stuck in congestion. They are seeing some of the worst parts of our city, some of the least upgraded roads, and the traffic congestion there is enormous because the State has pumped so many residents into its EDQ (Economic Development Queensland) areas at Northshore Hamilton. What did Labor want to do to improve the infrastructure there? They wanted to put in three intersection upgrades. That's what they wanted to do, Madam Chairman—was to gut the Kingsford Smith Drive project and deliver nothing for the long-suffering residents of the Hamilton Ward and of northern Brisbane. That was not the right decision, and thank goodness that the residents of Brisbane passed judgment on that. Now, Madam Chairman, never forget—I've said this before in previous budget debates—that Labor is a two-hit wonder when it comes to infrastructure in this city. I liken Labor's infrastructure hits to that of Tone Lōc who had two hits, Wild Thing and Funky Cold Medina. Over a decade in office, the Labor Party only build two roads—the Inner City Bypass and Coronation Drive. We all know what happened with the Inner City Bypass—we had to come and upgrade it—and Coronation Drive we had to remove their tidal flow system, because it was such a failure that the cars actually moved faster when we got rid of it. So these are hardly the people that you want to criticise us when it comes to our infrastructure spend. Now compare their spend, compare their Tone Lōc, to our Taylor Swift—a multi-platinum award-winning artist who has so many hits that you can keep going on about. Now I want you to think about this. Now on one album, 1989, Taylor Swift had five hits: Wildest Dreams, Shake it Off— Chairman: Councillor MURPHY, you're drawing a very long bow here. Councillor MURPHY: Madam Chairman, I will—look, so too this Administration has concepted and delivered the CLEM7 Tunnel— Councillor WINES: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor WINES? Councillor WINES: Would Councillor MURPHY take a question?

Chairman: Councillor MURPHY would you take a question? Councillor MURPHY: Happy to Councillor WINES. Chairman: Go ahead please, Councillor WINES. Councillor WINES: Would Councillor MURPHY please list the hits of the album 1989 by the artist Taylor Swift please. Councillor MURPHY: At your request, Councillor WINES, once again, Wildest Dreams, Shake it Off, Blank Space, Style and Bad Blood. I know that you know those hits because you are probably—other than Councillor SUTTON—the only Councillor in this Chamber to actually attend that concert—I know mate—when she came to Brisbane. So, Madam Chairman, so too this Administration has delivered CLEM7, the Go Between Bridge, Legacy Way, we're building Kingsford Smith Drive, we're getting on with the job of Wynnum Road, and we will build the Brisbane Metro. So dare I say this Administration has even more hits than Taylor Swift and a lot more left to come. So we will continue to deliver infrastructure for Brisbane. We will continue playing out to sell-out crowds around the city, while Labor can take their five-man band down to Twin Towns Services Club and play to the 300 people that are happy to pay a ticket to see them, Madam Chairman. Their representation in this Chamber continues to decrease as a result of it. So the people of Brisbane know that it's an LNP Council that it takes to build infrastructure in Brisbane. They know that when Labor are in government you get massive debt and you get very little infrastructure in return, and so too it's been out in my ward with Green Camp Road. Councillor COOPER touched on it. I'm very pleased to see that in this budget we have $28 million funding for Green Camp Road at Wakeley, which runs between Manly Road in the north and New Cleveland Road in the south in Councillor SCHRINNER's ward. I'm sure Councillor CUMMING is aware too that Green Camp Road services a whole range of road users in the south-eastern suburbs, including a lot of traffic coming in from Redland City to ours. The existing Rickertt Road and Tilley Road intersections have been operating well above their capacity for many years, and the congestion along Green Camp Road through both intersections is expected to increase as Redlands continues to grow. It currently carries about 30,000 vehicles per day, and crashes at the Green Camp Road and Tilley Road intersection slow that road on a very regular basis. So this upgrade is not only about improving travel times, but it's also about improving safety at a key intersection in our city. Council's been very pleased to work hand-in-hand with the Federal Government on this upgrade. I want to thank Dr Andrew Laming and Ross Vasta MP for their work to support what has been a very important project with their $10 million Federal contribution. They are the only level of government that is supporting this project I might add. I was going to let it go, but I have to mention the adventures of Don Brown MP, the Member of Capalaba, who has run the most pathetic scare campaign on Green Camp Road that we ever saw. As we know, Madam Chairman, Green Camp Road is in the budget, but feel free to pull me up if I'm getting off-topic. I wouldn't have mentioned it, as I said, but he did claim victory the other day, and I just want to run through some of the efforts that it's taken me to get this project funded versus what he's done. Now this all started last year when he—head of the Council campaign—invited me to a rally to upgrade Rickertt Road, which he happened to schedule for Anzac Day. When I politely declined attending that rally, he rescheduled and he got about 20 of his union mates to show up, and there was I think about four

residents there. Then he decided, ‘well, if Councillor MURPHY's not here we will use a PIP (Priority Infrastructure Plan) to hold him to account’. So he Googled Green Camp Road and came up with a PIP document that was out of date by the way, and noticed the date of delivery on the PIP and said, ‘oh Green Camp Road upgrade, it's scheduled for delivery in the timeframe of 2016-2020. That's a promise that the LNP has made’— Councillor SRI: Councillor MURPHY, I believe your time has expired. Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Excuse me Councillor SRI, you do not tell other Councillors in this place that their time has expired. I have the timer up here. You are not Chairman of this Council and I was just about to confirm that for Councillor MURPHY himself. So I do not need you to do my job for me. That is most disrespectful. Councillor WINES. Councillor WINES: Thank you, Madam Chairman— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: There are no extensions during budget time in accordance with 74(2)(f) of the Meetings Local Law.

ADJOURNMENT: 651/2016-17 At that time, 12.35pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Fiona KING that the meeting adjourn for a period of one hour, to commence only when all Councillors had vacated the Chamber and the doors have been locked.

Council stood adjourned at 12.37pm.

UPON RESUMPTION:

Chairman: Further debate? Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING: Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I refer to the infrastructure budget, Madam Chairman. Now, Madam Chairman, a lot of the budget isn't congestion-busting activities, for example road network resurfacing is not congestion-busting, Madam Chairman, it's a core Council activity, as we've said before and doesn't remotely reach the description of congestion-busting. But anyhow, I have had a close look at all the road network resurfacing and I'm always a bit suspicious when there's a big headline figure. I think it's 650 streets or something like that being resurfaced across the city. I thought well, if you want to get a lot of streets and get a big figure, you would pick the shortest streets you could, and I was just being a bit suspicious there. I started looking through the ones in the Wynnum Manly Ward and there's Cash Street for Manly West, $21,000; Halsted Street, Manly West, is $30,000; Iffley Street, Wynnum West, $32,000; Karloo Street, Wynnum, $26,000; Mercia Street, Manly West, $33,000; Vedella Street, Manly, $25,000. They're all pretty short streets, like a couple of houses at the most. I thought, I wonder if these cheaper, less costly streets to resurface are part of this resurfacing budget across the whole city, and lo and behold they are, Madam Chair, they are. They are. In fact, I did a tally and it comes to 216 out of the 650 streets being resurfaced are going to cost less than $50,000 each, Madam Chairman, and I can tell you from the costings I've had in the past for resurfacing a street, less than $50,000 is

a pretty short street. So Madam Chairman, I've dubbed this year of the resurfacing as ‘the year of the short street’—year of the short street, Madam Chairman. Now, I've got to say short streets are perfectly entitled to be resurfaced, Madam Chairman, perfectly so. I do not believe short streets should be discriminated against in any way, shape or form, Madam Chairman. In fact, to suggest they should be discriminated against would be totally wrong, Madam Chairman. But in this case they haven't been discriminated against, but they have been used. They have been used by the LORD MAYOR to get the numbers up, to get the numbers up. To get the numbers up to 650, they've gone for the short streets. They've pulled the short straw. They've pulled the short straw, they have— Councillor WINES: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Point of order against you, Councillor CUMMING. Councillor WINES. Councillor WINES: Madam Chairman, would the Leader of the Opposition take a question about the Wynnum Road resurfacing in Clara Street? The Wynnum resurfacing in Clara Street for $216,000 and in Claymeade Street for $209,000. Chairman: Councillor CUMMING, would you take a question? Councillor CUMMING: No. No, I've already heard the question. Chairman: No, Councillor WINES, he's declined. Councillor CUMMING: Look, to mix things up a bit, they have put in some long streets. They have put in some long streets. Councillor interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: Not many though, not many. Chairman: Order, order. Councillor CUMMING: Two-hundred and sixteen out of 650 are short streets, Madam Chairman— one-third. Chairman: Order! Thank you. Now we have the long and the short of it, Councillor CUMMING, could you please continue? Councillor CUMMING: Oh, got me by the short and curlies there, Madam Chair. Councillors interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: My apologies if that should be misinterpreted, Madam Chair. Anyhow, so Madam Chair—that's right. Madam Chair, I turn now to LATM (Local Area Traffic Management), a much safer area to deal with, the local area traffic management, Madam Chairman, or traffic calming. Now, the budget, I've always been critical of the budget for this program, ever since Councillor QUIRK became LORD MAYOR. This year it's $1.848 million, and we went back and looked over some of the older budgets and particularly back to 2010-11 when the LORD MAYOR was—I think it might have been his first budget, 2010-11—LATM was $2.8 million. That might have been Campbell Newman's last budget, Madam Chairman. So now today, eight years later, it's 34% less, and that's in absolute terms, that's not in real terms, Madam Chairman, so that is a massive cut, Madam Chairman, in the LATM budget and I think it's deliberate. I think the LORD MAYOR and the LNP, they actually don't believe in LATM, Madam Chairman. They've allowed the funding to drop away in the hope that it might wither and die all together, but that's not the case. There's still a lot of demand out there from residents whose streets are being used as a shortcut by other residents, who are often driving in excess of the

speed limit. They're concerned about danger to the streets, difficulty in accessing their properties in and out, and also if there's young children around the area who tend to play outside, chase a ball outside or whatever, they're concerned with their welfare as well. So I think it's an important program and I'd like to see it increased, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the other one I wanted to mention was Green Camp Road, and I welcome the funding for Green Camp Road. It's mainly a problem for Redlands residents—the residents flood out of the Redlands, up Rickertt Road in the morning and flood back in in the evening. What I think is needed, and I'm not sure from the description yet, I can't work out what's proposed, but I think Green Camp Road needs to be four lanes, obviously, from Manly Road to Rickertt Road, four lanes from Rickertt Road to Quarry Road. It also needs to be four lanes over the bridge at Tingalpa Creek, which will be a difficult one, because if that's not the case then there'll be just a big bottleneck getting over the bridge. Tingalpa Creek, sorry, is the boundary between Brisbane and Redlands, Madam Chairman. In addition, I believe traffic lights are required at the intersection of Green Camp Road and Tilley Road, because that's an extremely busy intersection. At peak hours it's matter of waiting, waiting, waiting and then charging across the intersection or waiting for the goodwill of passing motorists to stop and allow a couple of cars to go through, so I think lights are needed there. But Madam Chairman, and I'd just like to—seeing that Councillor MURPHY mentioned him, I'd like to mention Don Brown, the State Member for Capalaba as well, and compliment him on the excellent campaign he ran to get this area upgraded. He ran a great campaign. He put great pressure on the Federal Member for Bowman, Mr Andrew Laming, put great pressure on him and forced him to get Mr—I was going to call him Councillor Vasta—that would be a terrible thing. He tried to run against me one time, Madam Chairman. I've got to say, he went nowhere near, he went nowhere near. The local Federal Member, Mr Vasta, put pressure on him to get something done. It was crazy, some years ago the Redlands side of the creek has actually been upgraded. I believe it was during John Howard's time as Prime Minister. He provided funding there, and I think Mr Laming might have been the Federal Member at the time. But on the other side of the bridge was Kerry Rea. She was the Federal Member for Bonner at the time, and no money for that side of the bridge, so it was crazy stuff. I've got to say, this is an area, busy roads adjoining two local authorities, where I think there should be a smarter way to deal with it. I think I've heard something on the radio the other day about problems down in Rochedale with—I think it's Priestdale Road or one of those—and people complaining about the difficulty for getting in and out of their properties and the like from on the boundary of Brisbane and Logan, in that area. But anyhow, Madam Chairman, I compliment Mr Brown. He ran a great campaign and some part of this reason in getting the Federal funding anyhow was his efforts in putting pressure on Federal Members. So well done, Don, and I look forward to that intersection being upgraded and that area of roadway along Green Camp Road and Rickertt Road. Chairman: Councillor BOURKE. Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chair. Madam Chairman, I just rise to enter the debate on Program 2, and this is, as Councillor COOPER said, probably the most important program in our budget, because it is where we deliver on infrastructure for our growing city and provide the means of travel and transport, not just for residents, but for freight and for businesses across our whole city, Madam Chairman. But listening to debate in this place, whether it is on Program 1, Program 2, I imagine the debate that is coming in Program 3 around parks and environment,

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 136 all we hear, Madam Chairman, from the Labor Party, I think is a little bit of envy. When we were debating Program 1 earlier, they were talking about, ‘oh, the buses and the public transport system, you're not doing enough’. I just think they're envious of this Administration's track record on the way that we've invested and been able to deliver on a lot of things that they couldn't do when they were in administration. Things like a bike hire scheme, that was core Labor Party policy, which was implemented as CityCycle, Madam Chairman, and here in Program 2, Madam Chairman, we're getting on with the job of building the infrastructure that the residents of Brisbane need to continue to enjoy our city, to have a liveable city, to enjoy our lifestyle and leisure opportunities, Madam Chairman, and to go about business and do business in the City of Brisbane. So Madam Chairman, that envy stretches to the major information projects that this Administration has delivered, whether it's CLEM7, Legacy Way, the Go Between Bridge, Kingsford Smith Drive, the four-laning of the Inner City Bypass, the full upgrade with Stage 4 funded in this year's budget, Madam Chairman, for Progress Road in my ward, whether it's Boundary and Kelliher Road, which is that eternal project that the Labor Party under the Soorley administration wanted to do, but it took an LNP Administration to actually deliver. Whether it's the open level crossings, Madam Chairman, which we delivered as well. I just think it is a little bit of roads envy, and we know that when Councillor Abrahams was in this place, the Labor Party was on a roads diet, but Madam Chairman, there's just that little bit of roads envy coming up from those opposite. I have to though, pick up Councillor MURPHY on one of the things that he raised, because he said that the Labor Party built two roads when they were in power in this place. Councillor MURPHY, they actually did three road projects. They built the Inner City Bypass, they upgraded Coronation Drive, and then they had to dig up Coronation Drive again. They did it twice, because they actually dug through a newly-laid sewer main that had been put down by Brisbane Water and then had to go and replace the whole thing again and do a whole entire section of Coronation Drive. So they're very good at doing Coronation Drive, Councillor MUPRHY, through you Madam Chairman, but very little else across this city. That's why this Administration has had to shoulder the burden of investing year on year into infrastructure projects right across the city. Madam Chairman, we continue to do that with the budget that we have before us today. It doesn't matter whether it is those large infrastructure projects like Kingsford Smith Drive, right down to small traffic improvements out in the suburbs, Madam Chairman, this budget delivers for the whole of the city and provides benefits in busting congestion and improving safety right across the city. I mentioned before the Progress Road Stage 4 project. It's a $25 million investment in the 2017/18 Budget. It is going to, Madam Chairman, improve access and improve safety for the business area out there at Wacol. After the redistribution, I picked up a significant amount of industrial space. Councillor GRIFFITHS likes to say, ‘I've got the big industrial spaces here’. Well, he doesn't. Wacol, Darra is actually probably the heart of industry in the City of Brisbane. They sit in the Jamboree Ward, Madam Chairman, and Progress Road is the main artery leading out to the Centenary Highway for those residents—for those businesses, Madam Chairman. We have a lot of heavy industry in that area. At the moment there is a single lane, it literally would be all of a seven-metre wide bridge over the top of the creek, and this money here, the $25 million that's being allocated will see the upgrade to that last section of Progress Road—a project that was started by this Administration and will be completed by this

Administration, improving access for those businesses, making it easier for people to do business, but improving safety as well. We're also completing the Wacol Station Road bridge upgrade, Madam Chairman, so raising the bridge there out of the floodwaters that we have in Wolston Creek, Madam Chairman, and providing a flood-free access for my residents, but also for the businesses that go down into the Sumner Park industrial estate, Madam Chairman, so it's great to see the $11 million investment in this year's budget to complete that project. Then Madam Chairman, we have some smaller projects that are being completed across the ward as well. We have a Safe Routes to School project at the Jindalee State School that's going to be providing safer access for one of the side streets near the school, to obviously stop parents from doing U-turns in this side street, and it will be putting in a splitter island to improve safety and to stop that behaviour. We'll also be conducting improvements to Yallambee Road and Curragundi Road, as well as Yallambee Road and Looranah Street, Madam Chairman, through 2.1.2.2 and 2.1.2.3. These are safety improvements, a turning pocket in one case to get the cars who are trying to turn right out of the main line of traffic, but also another splitter island to improve pedestrian safety near the Jindalee Swimming Pool, Madam Chairman. So as you can see from Program 2, we continue to deliver and invest in projects —whether they're Kingsford Smith Drive, which is delivering a massive benefit to an industrial part of our city, it's a gateway and entrance into our city, Madam Chairman. It's providing completely new pedestrian and cycle facilities, right down to small suburban improvements, Madam Chairman, that are helping kids get to school safer or helping businesses be able to move around the area safer as well. There is also the road resurfacing program, Madam Chairman. Councillor CUMMING stood up and he waxed lyrically about the road resurfacing program. It was just another cunning stunt from Councillor CUMMING, Madam Chairman, trying to go the long and the short of an issue. Well, Madam Chairman, I guess he's just once again envious that this Administration is prepared to put our money where our mouth is and actually get on with the job of making smoother suburban streets for the residents of Brisbane. Because, we know that the Labor Party only spent $45 million on road resurfacing, Madam Chairman, on average during their time in the place. Their last budget was—Councillor COOPER—I think their last budget they spent $45 million a year on road resurfacing. We've doubled that—we're spending $90 million. We're resurfacing more roads than ever before. We're upgrading and doing more work on our infrastructure across the city. Madam Chairman, I know that some Councillors on the other side think that we should be putting all of our eggs into one basket, but Madam Chairman, all of these road projects actually benefit all of the different users of our roads and road network. The major road infrastructure projects where we're providing bikeways, well, that helps cyclists and pedestrians as well. These road projects where we're widening the Inner City Bypass, it actually has a benefit for public transport, because it provides a dedicated space for buses as well, Madam Chairman. So there are benefits to all of the different users on our road projects. What there's not—and I know Councillor SUTTON waxed lyrically about the last infrastructure plan that this Council prepared, Madam Chairman—what there's not, like the last infrastructure plan that the Labor Party prepared in this place, Madam Chairman, are things like this, Madam Chairman. The Labor Party, when they were in power in this place, and they produced an infrastructure plan—and for the benefits of fairness, there aren’t things like increased user charges on transport activities. There aren't taxes or levies related to private vehicle use, Madam Chairman. We have delivered all of this

infrastructure without cordon tolls, without increasing taxes and charges on the people who are driving motor vehicles, Madam Chairman. We are actually providing these facilities and doing this investment in infrastructure in a responsible financial and balanced way, Madam Chairman, and making sure that we're taking into account all modes. We aren't just trying to force people onto one mode of transport, like the Labor Party wanted to do, where they reduced the number of car parks, they wanted to introduce cordon tolling, they wanted to introduce a whole pile of charges and taxes, a parking levy, and a $400 parking levy in the CBD. These are Labor Party policies, and not one of those opposite has ever stood up and said they aren't our policies anymore. These are their written policies from when they were last in power in this place, Madam Chairman, and the challenge for them is to actually stand up now and go, ‘we don't believe in any of that, this is how we want to do it’. But this side of the Chamber, the people of Brisbane understand and know our commitment to delivering infrastructure. We know the way we get about it, the way we do it, we get on with the job, we actually deliver, and those on the other side, Madam Chair, as I said at the start, I just think they have a little bit of road envy, Madam Chairman. They wish that they could possibly deliver and be as good at delivering projects and providing infrastructure as this Administration, Madam Chairman. They wish they could, but Madam Chairman, at the end of the day all they do is talk. They never actually deliver, as we've seen from earlier debates. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on Program 2 – Infrastructure for Brisbane. I won't be supporting this program, basically because I think it spends far too much on a few large road upgrade projects, and far too little on much more urgently-needed, localised infrastructure projects such as pedestrian crossings, traffic management, et cetera. I think it's interesting to hear the trite debate around road resurfacing, but it doesn't sound like Councillors are meaningfully engaging with the fact that we are spending $90 million a year on resurfacing roads, and we're still not hitting all the roads that apparently need resurfacing. I've got Councillors from all sides of the Chamber telling me, ‘oh yes, there were roads in my electorate that needed resurfacing and didn't get resurfaced’, and I can think of a few in my area that are looking pretty ragged and pot-holey as well. But that's a black hole, that money that is being spent on resurfacing roads, and that's only going to get more expensive, and it's only going to get bigger in the coming years as we increase our spending on roads and we widen roads and we upgrade intersections to allow more cars to travel through them. So we're making our lives more difficult. We're making life for future Councillors more difficult as well by sinking so much money into projects that are calculated to increase the number of vehicles on our roads. It seems really short-sighted to me that we're spending $90 million-plus a year on that sort of infrastructure, and comparatively little on pedestrian crossings and traffic management. I should note with gratitude that a fair chunk of that LATM budget for this year is for an area of West End that already has traffic management, and the reason we're having to spend all that additional money is that we've underspent on public transport infrastructure, we've underspent on crossings and we've underspent on bike lanes, which is encouraging people to continue driving even when they live in the inner city. There are people within a couple of kilometres of the CBD who are still driving to work because they don't feel safe and comfortable as pedestrians or cyclists and they don't have reliable public transport services. I won't go into a diatribe about public transport under this program, but just to note that there are sections

of Kangaroo Point, sections of East Brisbane and sections of Highgate Hill that still don't have high-frequency buses and so those people are still driving. I would be strongly advocating that we reduce our spending on these major road upgrade projects and increase our spending on local area traffic management. I'm sure every Councillor in this place can think of parts of their ward where they'd love to see new pedestrian crossings around schools, around hospitals, around local commercial precincts, where for a very small injection of money we could drastically improve the lives of thousands of residents. We could reinvigorate those suburban commercial precincts. We could encourage and facilitate more children to walk and ride to school, rather than mum and dad having to act as taxi drivers. Those would all be great outcomes, but instead of that we're funnelling more money into these really big projects that have long timeframes, that chew up money. They are extremely expensive because of the properties we have to reclaim, they're extremely disruptive in terms of construction impacts on local residents and businesses. So when you think about what kinds of road projects deliver the best value for money, it's those small, targeted upgrades, like local pedestrian crossings and traffic management. I also note that Council still seems to be a little bit resistant to lowering speed limits, and I understand those same old arguments about, ‘oh, you can't drop the speed limit because of the built environment, but we can't change the built environment because of the speed limit’. It gets a bit circular. The point is that lowering speed limits reduces wear and tear on roads. It reduces our road maintenance and resurfacing budgets, it encourages more people onto bikes and walking. So that very cheap solution and change of lowering speed limits, particularly in areas of higher density, and particularly in areas with higher existing volumes of pedestrians, can help catalyse a shift towards more active transport and public transport, and can save this Council millions and millions of dollars. I'm not exaggerating, I'm not engaging in hyperbole, we could be saving millions and millions of dollars if we just dropped a few speed limits and spent a little bit more on those local pedestrian crossings and local traffic management. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the over-investment in the Kingsford Smith Drive project.

At that time, 1.56pm, the Deputy Chairman, Councillor Vicki HOWARD, assumed the Chair.

Councillor SRI: I hear on the ground that the timeframes are blowing out and there have been unpredicted costs and delays, and that to me is a real shame, because we've said to residents, ‘we don't have money to fix up that pedestrian crossing near your school, but we've got $650 million to get people to the airport’. I would have wondered why we didn't instead focus on improving the existing public transport services to the airport. I know the State Government is responsible for that cock-up so I'll leave that where it is. I'm not asking for the world. I'm not saying we need to massively increase spending. I'm saying we should reduce spending and allocate it differently. With the greatest respect, I'd suggest that maybe my Labor colleagues are trying to have a bet each way, where they're arguing both for those major road projects and also for the little infrastructure projects, the more LATMs, the more footpaths et cetera—you probably can't do both unless you're willing to take on a bit more debt. So either cut spending on those major projects and direct it towards those little projects, or take on debt. Councillor interjecting. Councillor SRI: Yes, exactly. Kingsford Smith Drive is the biggest and most glaring one, but I would add Wynnum Road to that one as well, where we're spending $115 million on a 700-metre stretch of road. That's got to be one of the most expensive road projects in the country, surely—700 metres and $115 million? It's pretty bizarre when you think about what else we could be using that money for.

I'd just say to all the Councillors in this place that a lot of these sorts of upgrades —and the same goes for flood mitigation and kerb and channel work and all those other program items—spending more money now will save us money in the long term. If that means we have to take on more debt now to deliver urgently needed infrastructure, that will save us money down the line and will more than justify the interest and the other costs of taking on those loans. So do not be afraid of debt-funded infrastructure. Do not capitulate to the narrow terms of debate where both sides of the political Chamber criticise each other for taking on debt. It's actually cheaper to take on debt now and to deliver that infrastructure than it is to wait years and years as costs rise, as labour costs rise, as the costs of acquiring land rises and it gets harder and harder to deliver that infrastructure. Particularly in my ward, I just want to note I was very disappointed that the crossing at Vulture Street East in East Brisbane was not included for funding. It's been right near the top of my priority list for a couple of years now. I would happily see even 0.5% of the budget to widen Lytton Road just reallocated, just a couple of hundred metres away, to fix that crossing over Vulture Street East so that kids can get to school, so that pensioners can cross the road to get to the local shops, so that workers can cross the road to get to the bus stop. You're spending $115 million just at the other side of the suburb, and you can't even find a couple of hundred thousand for that urgently needed traffic light down on Vulture Street East? It's a really odd position to be in, to have to explain to my residents that actually, Council's spending hundreds of millions of dollars in this suburb, but they're still not spending it where you want them to spend it. I also just wanted to mention the Gladstone Road pedestrian safety concerns, which again are increasing because there's higher volumes of traffic along that corridor, and again it plays into that same concern that we're encouraging people to travel by private vehicles, and therefore we're making it less safe and more hostile for pedestrians. Better pedestrian crossings, build-outs and pedestrian safety changes along Gladstone Road would be money well spent and would benefit residents of the outer suburbs as well, because it will mean fewer inner city residents are driving. Which means that those residents from the outer suburbs who don't have an alternative to driving, will be able to have a clearer run into the city, because those inner city residents will no longer be congesting roads. So please don't think of this as, ‘oh, where's all the money for the inner city’. I know a lot of money is being spent on the inner city, but if you spend that money to improve active transport within the inner suburbs, those benefits will flow through to the rest of the city.

At that time, 2.00pm, the Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN, resumed the Chair.

Councillor SRI: Finally, I just want to note that this Administration's continuing resistance to including transit lanes, T3s, T2s, and bus lanes on major road corridors is regressive, is anti-progress, and is a huge lost opportunity. I'm not saying that things like lowering speed limits and transit lanes are magic wands where we can wave them and suddenly all our problems will be fixed and congestion will go away overnight. I'm not arguing that, but I am saying that this Administration needs to more seriously consider transit lanes as many other cities have done. They don't work on every corridor, obviously there are a range of factors, but there are plenty of places in this city where if you simply say that one of those lanes is a T2 lane or a T3 lane, that will encourage people to carpool, it will mean buses have a quicker run into the city, which means that because the buses are— Councillor interjecting. Councillor SRI: Sorry, I missed that interjection, but anyway it will encourage more people to shift to public transport.

Chairman: Councillor SRI, your time has expired. Further debate? Councillor WINES. Councillor WINES: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak in support of Program 2 – Infrastructure for Brisbane. I commend this program for a number of reasons, including the fact that not only does it address the serious traffic issues in the city by funding major works that have commenced, but also by addressing the day-to-day business of this Council by a huge investment in local road resurfacing. One of the most fundamental things that this Council does, that any council does. I'd like to say to all the little streets that this Council loves you too, just as much as the big streets. So no, it's been a fantastic investment to try and address the need to correct a lot of the subterranean faults in streets that are occurring. It's a fantastic thing, I've noticed it personally, that the quality of our services across the streets, both locally and in many parts of the city are a lot better, and it's an investment that's going to stand the test of time. Dare I say it's better to spend the money today, than spend huge sums of money in the future, to borrow an idea from an earlier speaker. It's also one of the ideas why we have to do Kingsford Smith Drive now, because, to borrow from an earlier speaker, labour costs are going to go up, and land resumption costs are going to go up. The requirement to do this project in the future will become far more necessary than it is today, and that's why we're doing Kingsford Smith Drive now, because the northside and the north-eastern suburbs, the vast population increases that—I forget the—EDQ—the State Government planning authority that has no recourse. There's no way you can challenge it through the courts, no way an ordinary person can challenge any of their decisions—has put a huge amount of new population in that area that has to be serviced, along with Australia TradeCoast. This is a necessary upgrade to address the existing situation. I also wanted to note that Wynnum Road is a road much in the same vein. The shortcoming exists today and has to be addressed today. I also wanted to just make note of the fact that the speaker who preceded me, Councillor SRI, said that the answer was more active transport and more public transport. I should remind the Chamber that Councillor SRI voted against the funding of active transport and the public transport subsidy only two hours ago, so I would question the genuine commitment to public transport. Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chair. Claim to be misrepresented. Councillor WINES: All I said, Madam Chairman, is that he did not cast his vote in support, but rather against the public transport subsidy and against active transport and against the bikeways. That is what he did do. Once again, I question the genuine commitment to active transport through that vote. I just wanted to take a moment just to speak about some local projects in my own area. I look forward to this financial year the completion of the Pickering Street light crossing, something that people have heard me discuss in this place before. But it's one of those things that on a personal note, this is something I believe should have been there for many years, and it's of great personal pride that we're going to be able to see that completed, I believe this calendar year, but definitely this financial year, to service the needs of what now Our Lady of the Assumption Catholic Primary School at Enoggera. But when I was there it was Mt Maria Junior Secondary High School, my old alma mater. That was necessary then and I'm glad to see that we'll be building it for the future of the Enoggera community. I also want to talk about other pedestrian upgrades for the Windsor area on the border of my own ward with Councillor KING, that's going to be of great service to the

Windsor State School community, a necessary active transport pedestrian upgrade that will service a great many people, as will the Hillbrook Anglican School's new safe school travel work that will I expect occur around Pickering Street and the nearby streets of that school that will greatly service that community. I also wanted to note and show my gratitude to the LORD MAYOR and to Councillor COOPER for the continued funding of the works for the intersection upgrade for Kedron Brook Road and Days Road, and for Raymont Road and Grange Road. They are needed for safety for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians, and while there's some contention about some issues through the consultation process, that's a point of consultation. We do it so that we learn what the neighbours think and find out ways to improve projects. So I'm looking forward to the completion of those projects over the coming years. They're necessary and popular and I'm looking forward to their completion. In summary, this program is a way that we address the big problems of the city, the little problems of the city, and also there's something for our own constituencies to make sure that life improves and that the lifestyle and liveability of our city is constantly improving. I commend it to the Chamber and I look forward to its support. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SRI had misrepresentation. Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. Just briefly to clarify that yes, I did vote against Program 1 in the budget, but that's not because I'm opposed to active transport. It's because I'm opposed to specific decisions and funding priorities within that budget. Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SRI. Councillor CASSIDY, you have the floor. Councillor CASSIDY: Thanks very much, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on Program 2 and to talk about a few local projects. Before I do—these are local projects too—I do just want to pick up on the theme that the Leader of the Opposition started with there in terms of road resurfacing, and some of the short streets that are being resurfaced. In fact, some of the shorter streets, I presume being resurfaced in this budget, are in the Deagon Ward. We have Lagoon Street, the grand sum of $13,000, and Miriam Street, Boondall for the sum of $13,000. I've never seen these streets be requested for resurfacing, nor have I ever seen them, Madam Chair, on any list the technical officers have produced. While some streets in the Deagon Ward that are being resurfaced are large sums of money, and some streets do appear on those listings by the technical officers that do up the priorities, I suppose, that feed into this process, a whole lot of these aren't. So I'm struggling to understand the decision that's been made to include a lot of these streets for resurfacing, where they probably didn't need to be done this year, when there's a strong need for other streets in my ward to be done that have been left out, and a whole heap of people are certainly scratching their heads throughout this organisation, Madam Chair, and out in the community will be as well. Particularly when we have a street like, for instance, Barclay Street in Deagon, which had all its preparatory work done, had all the kerbing and channelling, now has all the temporary crossovers for people's driveways, with the expectation that that would be funded in this year's budget, and it's been left out, Madam Chair. So long-term planning does go into these projects where kerbing and channelling work can be done in the year preceding that, and then all of a sudden the street disappears from those listings altogether, so those people have

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 143 to live with that street that's in dire need of resurfacing after being chopped up by QUU and its predecessor Brisbane Water when it was in Council's hands, and hasn't been resurfaced for many, many, many years. That's exactly right, Councillor BOURKE, 10 years ago. It's been chopped up quite significantly, and it was supposed to have been resurfaced, certainly on the priority list, but hasn't been included. So, certainly I would love some explanation about how these streets were actually devised, because I don't believe it was done in the best way for our residents. I'd like to talk about LATMs, and certainly the lack of an LATM for Aberdeen Parade, Lyndhurst Road, Normanhurst Road and Rostrevor Road in Boondall. This is something I've been on the record in this place about, and it has been the record and on the Council's priority list for about the last five or six years now, Madam Chair. Year after year, since about 2010 or 2011, it's been the number one project in this area of the budget for the local Councillor, for me and my predecessor. It's also been the only project that appears on the Council officers listing for this area of the budget, Madam Chair. I conducted a survey of these streets in late 2015, and 86% of residents were in support of an LATM there. I presented a petition to this Council this year, Madam Chair, and the response from Councillor COOPER and the Infrastructure Committee was that this area would in fact benefit from an LATM. We're not talking about millions of dollars here, or hundreds of thousands of dollars to install traffic control devices, what we're talking about is funding to do the consultation and early design work, Madam Chair. Having Council already confirm that this is a project which should go ahead year, after year, after year, and not funding it, it really beggars belief. When you've got Council officers who are agreeing with the local Councillor, who is agreeing with the local residents that this is an area of high priority, an area in which they're sick and tired of inconsiderate drivers using their streets as a shortcut and a racetrack, how the decision then is made in year in, year out to not allocate any funding to this—and it's quite clearly a political decision, Madam Chair. Those people in those streets would be forgiven for thinking they're being punished somehow by this Administration, Madam Chair, because after being told quite clearly, ‘yes, this is an area in which we think we should be spending this money’, coming from the Council officers and then year in, year out, the decisions that are being made by the LORD MAYOR to not do that, Madam Chair. As I said, these residents are absolutely sick and tired of being forgotten about. Their biggest concern, for a lot of them, not only is having cars racing up and down their streets and not being able to get out—I spoke to a resident there a couple of weeks ago who waited 10 minutes to back out of their driveway. These aren't thoroughfares, Madam Chair, these are what should be fairly quiet suburban streets. A lot of people have young families there. We are having a regeneration I suppose in this particular part of Brisbane. Housing is relatively affordable still in Boondall, so a lot of families are moving to the area and there's a lot of children in these streets now, and people have real-life concerns about the safety of their children in their streets in the morning and afternoon five days a week, Madam Chair. To find out that there is now, after successive budgets, 34% less funding going into LATMs, is very disappointing, Madam Chair. I go on to jump back a minute to road resurfacing and just talk about Racecourse Road at Deagon. This is a road, it's not a particularly big one but it's one that the LORD MAYOR committed to widening and resurfacing and kerbing and channelling and providing parking for the Sandgate-Redcliffe District Cricket Club during the last election. He's since backpedalled on that, even though it's in black and white in a commitment on Facebook, Madam Chair, that he would do it. A photo that he was tagged in,

Madam Chair, by his candidate, and the cricket club certainly has a very clear recollection of that commitment, Madam Chair. When I last raised this, Councillor WYNDHAM, through you Madam Chair, said the real problem there is not the parking for the cricket club, he said, ‘don't worry about that, that's not a problem. The real problem is the state of the road —it needs to be resurfaced because of trucks using it for the Gateway upgrade’. Well, he said, ‘you need to go away and talk to Lendlease and the State Government’. Well, through you, Madam Chair, we did, and guess what, Councillor WYNDHAM? It's been resurfaced. It's being resurfaced. It's going to happen. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor WYNDHAM! Councillor CASSIDY: Yes, that's right. Okay. Yes, that's right. Lendlease and the State Government— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor CASSIDY: We've done our part, Councillor WYNDHAM, so how about you have a quiet word to your boss here. Chairman: Councillor BOURKE! Councillor CASSIDY: How about you have a quiet word to your boss and say, ‘remember that commitment you made to the families of the Sandgate-Redcliffe District Cricket Club? How about you actually follow through on that commitment?’ The road has been resurfaced, Councillor WYNDHAM, so what's the next step now? Should they still not care about it, or do you think that that commitment that your party made should actually be followed through on? Silence. Silence, Madam Chair. Now moving on to the Telegraph Road upgrade— Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor KING! Councillor CASSIDY: Moving on to the Telegraph Road upgrade, Madam Chair, and specifically Lemke Road through there. This is an upgrade that I, from day one in this role, have campaigned pretty strongly on with the community, and to have the outcome that we are is certainly very good to have that flood-proofed and widened. However, there has been an emerging issue along Lemke Road in terms of pedestrian safety, and as we saw a tragedy last year, a pedestrian was struck and killed on this section of road. I've been working with that constituent of mine's husband who has survived her, and he's very concerned around pedestrian safety on this road. As part of that Lemke Road upgrade, we have been seeking not only with local residents concerned about safety there, but also other key stakeholders, including the Singh Sabha Gurudwara and also the Sandgate Hawks AFL Club. I've been advocating on their behalf for a number of months now to include a signalised intersection servicing both the club and the Sikh temple there, which would also provide a safe and dedicated pedestrian crossing so we can hopefully never see again that tragedy that struck that family and that community on that road. Unfortunately, the response that we keep getting is that it's outside of the scope of the project, even though it's within the project itself. Madam Chair, I don't accept that. I have raised that with Councillor COOPER, and will continue to do so as well, because it's an issue that is really important as the club grows. Council is investing in that club—the AFL is investing in that club. As the Sikh community seeks to grow their community and facilities on their site, on Lemke Road, we're going to see an increased number of pedestrian

movements across Lemke Road at that location, Madam Chair. Without having dedicated, protected pedestrian crossing facilities, people are extremely worried that with the advent of four lanes through there—instead of crossing two at that point, having four across there, with an increased number of vehicle movements in and out, that this will become a serious problem and I would certainly love to see that addressed. Thank you, Madam Chair. Chairman: Councillor KING. Councillor KING: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise in support of Program 2, and I'm absolutely delighted to be a part of this Administration who support infrastructure development and keeping the northside of Brisbane moving. I'd like to thank the LORD MAYOR and Councillor COOPER for all their work on this project, but I thought back of why the northside for many, many years under the ALP administration was neglected. I thought long and hard about this, Madam Chair, and then I thought, I remember when Councillor Hayes went to a small group of shops in Stafford and said to them, ‘why?’—because they wanted a SCIP (Suburban Centre Improvement Projects) program, they wanted some help doing up the local shops. Councillor Hayes said to them, ‘why would you have a shop like this in this area?’ She didn't even support that particular area of Stafford having nice shops, a nice place to go. They were the people that voted her in. But then, Madam Chair, I thought a little bit more after I was—because that's why I actually stood up for preselection back in 2007, because of Councillor Hayes's comments. I thought after 2008, when I got elected, I distinctly remember Councillor Flesser saying to me, ‘what are you doing this weekend, Councillor KING’, at a function. I said ‘oh, I'm working’, and he goes, ‘that's like you guys, working really hard. Do you know what, Councillor KING? It's easier to do nothing than to deliver something in the local area’. So then I went back and thought about it a little bit more and went, ‘why did the ALP not deliver anything on the northside?’ Now, let me go back and tell you—Central Ward, ALP; Grange Ward, ALP; Deagon Ward, ALP; McDowall Ward, ALP; Northgate Ward, ALP; Marchant Ward, ALP; Enoggera Ward, ALP. The lonely Liberal ward out there was Bracken Ridge. Since this Administration has had an LNP representing the northside, we are finally getting results, and I'm absolutely proud that the northside is no longer neglected under LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK and Councillor COOPER. I want to go on to road resurfacing, because it's really quite interesting listening to the discriminatory actions of those opposite saying short streets don't matter. I'm proud to say that this Administration believes short streets are just as important as long streets. Now, I don't know why they don't like small things on the northside, but let me go through—gee whiz, thank you LORD MAYOR for the amount of road resurfacing I've got in Marchant Ward. Barbigal Street, that's a really small street, $249,000; Caratel Street, another really small street, $189,000; Copperfield Street, again a large street in Geebung; Delaware Street, another extremely long street in Geebung. Ellison Road—now, anyone on the northside will know Ellison Road is about this big, Madam Chair. It's a tiny wee little street. We have to spend $465,000 on that one. Harold Street, Stafford, another $313,000. The list goes on and on and on, but you know what? I'm still happy my little Ashworth Street—you know, Ashworth Street, you are just as important as Ellison Road, and I'm delighted this LORD MAYOR sees that short streets should not be discriminated against across our city. Madam Chair, LATMs. Thank you, LORD MAYOR, after us doing some serious work out in Marchant Ward, we're getting the Ferrier Street in Aspley LATM program, which will be designed in consultation. I'm looking forward to

this. There's great ideas coming out from our residents, and I'm looking forward to the consultation process starting. This Administration also believes strongly in large projects and small projects across our city. Councillor interjecting. Councillor KING: Short projects as well are not discriminated against on this side of the Chamber. Madam Chair, again I would like to thank the LORD MAYOR for the pedestrian refuge up in the Windsor area to assist with pedestrian crossing, which is a short and small project, and just as importantly, I would like to thank the LORD MAYOR for the three major projects that are happening in the Marchant Ward and continue to happen in the Marchant Ward. We've heard on the other side that this Administration doesn't do enough for active travel or cycle travel across our city. We've heard opposite from a Councillor over there, that he wants to force people out of cars—force people out of cars and make them walk or catch public transport or ride a bike. This Administration believes you cannot force people, but you can give people choices, Madam Chair. It is all about choice—not forcing people. Can I say, Madam Chair, to the Councillor on the other side who brought this up —when you become a father, and I hope you do one day, you'll learn that you will become a taxi, okay? Because that's what happens when you have kids. You can encourage them all different ways, but you'll be a taxi way until they're in their twenties. Madam Chair, the projects I'd like to speak about in particular is Days Road and Kedron Brook Road. As Councillor WINES said, we are out there at the moment doing consultation about that roundabout turning into lights. It's not just about vehicle movements, Madam Chair, that is a very well-used cycle route into the CBD area, and we're upgrading it for cycle movement, pedestrian movement as well as vehicle movement. Again, it's about the three different ways of travel that people are doing through that intersection, that are treated equally through this intersection upgrade. Murphy and Ellison Road—thank you, Councillor COOPER for this one. This one is still under consultation and under detailed design at the moment. As Councillor COOPER said before, there are resumptions in this process, so we've had to treat these people with respect as we go through that resumption process. Once this project is finished it will be four lanes down to Gympie Road. There will be some pedestrian improvement safety as well as cycle safety as part of this project, and I'm delighted that we've actually extended it down to Butt Street, Madam Chair, and putting lights there as well. Thank you, Councillor COOPER for that, because that little section of Geebung there found it extremely difficult, whether it was by car, cycle or pedestrian, actually getting out of that suburb. So I'd like to thank you again for that particular project. Raymont and Grange Road is well and truly underway and I thank you for that project as well. As I said before, they're my major projects that are happening. This Administration believes in small, congestion-busting projects as well. So I'm delighted that we're looking at the intersection of Ellison and Kirby Road, Hamilton Road and Funnell Street, Hamilton Road and Gympie Road. Now, this is a State Government-controlled intersection, Madam Chair, that has been neglected by the State Government for way too long. I will not stop pushing for the State Government to do something about Gympie Road, about pedestrian safety, because they keep on ignoring the fact. They're not even thinking about the extension of the Northern Busway, Madam Chair, for another 20 years, and that's when they will do something about Gympie Road. By that time, Gympie Road will be at a standstill because of their neglect, Madam Chair. We go on. Rode and Cherston Street, Chermside West. Rode and Parkdale. Now, if you have a netballer, you will know that particular area exceptionally

well, so I'm delighted we're addressing that intersection. Rode and Webster Road is another one we're looking at. Councillor SRI might remember that one quite well because it wasn't far from the high school he went to. Webster Road and Gympie Road; Webster, Rode; and Rode and Maundrell Terrace. Again, Madam Chair, we are delivering these projects faster than any other council, I would say, in Australia, with a minimal rate rise. If we go back to how I started this debate this morning about how little Labor delivered on the northern suburbs of our city, neglected our northern suburbs of the city, their rate increase was over 42% in six or seven years. This Administration are delivering far more than what the ALP had ever delivered with a rate increase in the same period of 23%. So how can we deliver more for our area, with far less rate increases when they did nothing on the other side? We'll go back to Councillor Flesser’s famous words to me as a young Councillor back in 2008, it's far easier, Madam Chair, to do nothing than to deliver. Madam Chair, I fully support this program. I'm proud to be an LNP Councillor under the leadership of LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK, and the Deputy of Councillor COOPER, because we truly want to keep Brisbane moving into the future. Thank you. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor GRIFFITHS. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Wow, wasn't that an interesting speech, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I stand to rise to speak on Program 2. Pork-barrelling. Madam Chair, we've just heard from a northside Councillor how they're pork-barrelling the northside, how the LORD MAYOR is spending and spending and spending on— Councillor KING: Claim to be misrepresented, Madam Chair. Chairman: Thank you. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Spending and spending and spending on the northside, and it hasn't gone unnoticed by residents. Madam Chair, can I tell you, just recently I've been approached by Liberal Party members who are in the same branches as some of the people in this room, who are appalled by their performance, who are sickened by the lack of delivery for the southside, who see that they're being conned by this LORD MAYOR and this Council. Liberal Party members, and boy are they unhappy. Councillors interjecting. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Boy, are they unhappy, and they're not going away. There's at least three Councillors on that side of the Chamber that I think should be worried about preselection. Madam Chair, it was interesting. It was interesting to hear— Councillors interjecting. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Madam Chair, it was interesting to hear about the pork-barrelling on the northside. I want to talk about some of the issues for the southside, because we know it's been ignored. We know that the Coopers Plains crossing hasn't been funded yet again. It hasn't received a cent of funding from this Council. Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Councillor BOURKE! Councillor GRIFFITHS: Excuse me, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, I just pulled Councillor BOURKE up. Councillor GRIFFITHS: This is despite the fact that the LNP in this Chamber supported two crossings on the northside—Telegraph Road and Geebung Road. Councillor KING: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor KING. Councillor KING: Would the Councillor take a question? Councillor GRIFFITHS: No. You've had your opportunity to speak. Councillors interjecting. Councillor GRIFFITHS: This is despite those two crossings having a lower priority than the Coopers Plains crossing, a lower priority, but once again, we've had Councillor KING admit that we're into pork-barrelling the northside. That's proof. Madam Chair, we haven't seen a 50-50 commitment from this Council, but we did see a 50-50 commitment with the State Government for the Geebung and Telegraph Road crossings. Madam Chair, we know Coopers Plains is the worst rail road crossing in Queensland. We know it is the most congested rail road crossing in Queensland. In fact, we've had that presentation in our Infrastructure Committee, and Councillor COOPER was happy to acknowledge that it was the worst rail road crossing. In fact, the RACQ support that fact as well, and yet this Council, which says it deals with infrastructure and says it's concerned about the people and the residents of Brisbane, it's concerned about the industry in Brisbane, while it holds its hand on its heart, is not delivering a basic piece of infrastructure required for a major congestion hotspot on the southside. LORD MAYOR, don't think that your residents and your branch members don't realise that this isn't being funded, because they've raised that in their discussions with me as well. It is astounding that this has been missed again by this Council and this Administration. It's even worse when we hear this Administration supporting the Inland Rail network, which won't stop at the port, which will stop at Acacia Ridge, and then all those trains will have to be unloaded to be taken to port via this very crossing. What hypocrisy. Madam Chair, we haven't seen any money for Oxley Road and the massive congestion problem along there, or indeed Sherwood Road, where we have Brisbane Markets, a major employer on the southside. I'm really interested, Madam Chair, and I'm extremely disappointed that there's been a re-phasing of the design for Kerry and Beatty Roads. That is a major intersection that needs to be signalised for the safety of that industrial area and the performance of the airport and the surrounding industry, which we're intensifying development in. What have we done? We've taken the design over two years. That's just appalling, and I think it's appalling for the Chairperson to allow that to happen. This is the Chairperson who will pull people up for being five minutes late to Committee, but can't deliver a designed project herself in a designated timeframe. Madam Chair, we need that done. We need it done for industry. We need it done for expansion of the airport, for safety and also for diverting trucks out of Acacia Ridge. We currently through the residential area of Acacia Ridge have 600 heavy vehicles travel to a facility that brings waste from all over the country to it. Those 600 trucks are travelling past two schools. So don't give me, ‘we care about residents and we care about kids’ when this is an example of you not caring about those kids. It just shows the poor record and the poor performance of the LNP in this place, and I won't stop saying it, and my vote keeps going up. Your votes keep going down, and one day there'll be a turnaround of those votes, Madam Chair. Councillor interjecting.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: One day there will be, and we'll actually be able to— Councillors interjecting Councillor GRIFFITHS: And we'll actually be able to look— Chairman: Order! Councillor GRIFFITHS: We'll actually be able to— Chairman: Order! Councillor WINES! Councillor GRIFFITHS: We'll actually be able to stop pork-barrelling and look after all the residents of Brisbane. Madam Chair, they talk about Kingsford Smith Drive, the $650 million debacle. It's going to allow traffic to travel one minute faster. Six hundred and fifty million for one minute faster. That does not make sense. It's gold-plating a road that doesn't need to be gold-plated. Finally, Madam Chair, the hollow promise of resurfacing. Moorooka Ward has seen a massive drop in the resurfacing budget. Councillor KING, it's not about short streets, it's— Councillor interjecting. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Councillor KING, it's not about short streets, it's actually about streets that need to be resurfaced, and my argument is the same as Councillor CASSIDY. I saw the list that went up that was prioritised by the officers around need. I supported that list, and it has been bastardised by someone in this Council. Chairman: Councillor— Councillor GRIFFITHS: Madam Chair— Chairman: Order, order! Order! Councillor GRIFFITHS, I believe you're imputing motive with that comment and I find it inappropriate for this Chamber. I ask you to withdraw. Councillor GRIFFITHS: I will withdraw, Madam Chair. Chairman: Thank you, Councillor GRIFFITHS. Councillor GRIFFITHS: The list that the professional officers put together and which I supported, is not the list that is in the budget. The list that the officers sent up was based on need, and in my area there are many, many roads affected by flooding that are damaged that are in urgent need of repair and replacement. What we've seen this year under the LORD MAYOR's budget is a cut to resurfacing in Moorooka Ward. So, business is being conned, residents are being conned, and we certainly know where the money is—it's going to the northside. So keep singing about the northside, Councillor KING, but there'll be a few Councillors on the southside that shouldn't be singing about the lack of performance of this Council for their areas. I remain disappointed with this budget. It's a con for my residents, because it actually doesn't deliver much and we're a city that needs to deliver based on need, not just based on the fact that you're an LNP ward or not. Thank you, Madam Chair. Councillor KING: Thank you, Madam Chair, claim to be misrepresented. Chairman: Yes. Councillor KING, can you just wait— Councillor KING: Madam Chair— Chairman: —until I do call you, please? Councillor KING: Sorry. Chairman: Councillor KING, your misrepresentation? Councillor KING: I apologise, Madam Chair.

Councillor GRIFFITHS said that I said that northside was pork-barrelled. I did not. I said we are finally getting infrastructure and keeping the northside moving after it was represented by seven out of 10 ALP Councillors who neglected the northside. Chairman: Thank you, Councillor KING. Councillor McKENZIE, you have the call. Councillor McKENZIE: Thanks, Madam Chairman, and first of all I'd like to say that this is of course one of the— Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor KING! Councillor McKENZIE: One of the most important programs, delivering over $1 billion worth of work to the city. As the debate goes on, I hear from the other side the shrieks and the screams and the whingeing gets stronger and stronger. Everything is happening to somebody else and it's not happening to them. Well, I can tell you this—that Brisbane City Council governs not only for your wards or my ward, but for the totality of people in this city. We are planning and designing key infrastructure to assist everybody. We can't do it all at once. Now, it's easy to see that the problems and the inaction or unimaginative action of the other side has created incredible problems that we've had to solve. We've had to pick up those problems. Councillor KING is right, they don't want to do the hard jobs. They want to do the easy jobs or nothing at all, and we all know that doing nothing creates no criticism. But we're creating a new Transport Plan for Brisbane, and this plan will prepare for a long-term framework delivering transport networks to achieve a vision for the future. It will also address emerging technology such as electric and autonomous vehicles, low-emission vehicles and the movement of freight, and importantly, it is important for Councillor SUTTON to note—who says that we're ossified in our views—that there is enough flexibility built into this plan to accommodate technological changes which are currently unforeseeable. It's been mentioned the three magnificent projects, the Inner City Bypass widening, Kingsford Smith Drive, and the widening of Wynnum Road. It struck me when I was listening to the talk about Kingsford Smith Drive about how wonderful it is and how much money we're spending on it. Well, what's wrong with gold-plating something that's going to give us a lifetime of service? Let me think, there were some other projects that the Labor Party did sort of on the cheap. What was that one, the Riverwalk—river base—it sank into the river, it's no longer there. Now, that was done on the cheap. I can't believe that that would have been considered, a floating Riverwalk of thousands of tonnes of concrete that would inevitably go down to the bottom. Now, is that the sort of thing that we want in this Council? No, not on this side. We want to do the job right and we want to do it right in the first instance. Look, we'll be investing money where it's needed. We have argy-bargy with the Council officers—I don't get everything I want but I have to suck up what I can get, and am pleased with what I have in my ward of Coorparoo. For example, we are interested to see that citywide, we're putting in $8.5 million of traffic lights across the city. I am fortunate enough to have two of these traffic lights in my ward—one at Goring Street, Coorparoo, which is extremely popular. I note Councillor SUTTON comes over to my ward, and you know, she talks to the people in my ward. Do you know why they're talking to you, Councillor SUTTON? Because they want you to change something. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor SUTTON! Councillor McKENZIE: You know what? They're never going to vote for you. Councillor interjecting.

Chairman: Councillor SUTTON! Councillor McKENZIE: You'll never get one vote over that area. Nobody is interested in voting for the Labor Party. They just want some change, but forget it, you're wasting your time coming over. It's an embarrassment having you there. Councillors interjecting. Councillor McKENZIE: Also, safety of schoolchildren, and I can say this—there's one glaring example here where we're stepping up to the plate where the State Government should, and that's at MacGregor High School. It's in Councillor HUANG's ward. We've guaranteed to pay half the cost of a drop-and-go facility and we're waiting and waiting for the State Government to give us the okay to do that. But no, they're keeping us on the hook. New technology with regard to pedestrian safety and administration. We're introducing initiatives such as LED lights, park lighting and CBD ‘smart poles’. Now, I've done a bit of work on these ‘smart poles’ and they seem to be problems looking for solutions, which is of course a great thing. There can be numerous things hung off these ‘smart poles’—and this is my own research, it's not research from Council. We can put Wi-Fi connections, LED lighting; they can be controlled from a central point. They can have audio and possibly visible messages. They have energy-saving, they have sensors, CCTV, power outlets, solar-powered, real-time traffic lights and TV. So there's some initiatives that we're introducing into the city to make the area a lot safer. Not to mention the great success we have with flashing speed warning signs at blackspots across the city. Some of these areas, they are the only ways that we can alert drivers to the dangers of these intersections that we have, and residents are pleased about this. I speak to residents—most of them are law-abiding, they don't realise that they're going a little bit fast in the street and they'll slow down. The statistics on this are clear. We have these statistics going back over millions of cars and they're very useful to read out. They work and we're happy that they work. Parking is an increased concern, and rationality of our parking management by this Administration has occurred with our Brisbane Parking Taskforce. This is going in all our wards. It's a great asset to schools and it's a great way to rationalise the parking. The major infrastructure programs, if I can talk about my Coorparoo Ward for one second. The major beneficiaries, as I said, we've two sets of traffic lights, at Whites Hill sports field. Now, anybody that's been down Boundary Road, Whites Hill sports complex is a massive complex and it's a victim of its own success. There's only one way out there and it does get very congested, and it's very difficult to put another exit there. But traffic lights there for over $2 million will assist not only residents of my ward, but all those residents around Brisbane who use that facility. Also, not in this budget but in the budget after—and Councillor SRI will know about this—we're committing $641,000 to the Logan Road, O'Keefe Street and Junction Street for a design there, which will be very welcome. It's a concern to me that that area there is dangerous, and I'm very pleased to support that. That's in this budget, I'm saying. Also, in the next budget, Chatsworth Road, Boundary Road and Samuel Street intersection is designed for $1 million. It's been an ongoing problem there. As road traffic increases, these multiple junctions become much more dangerous. Minor local access network improvements are very important to residents, and they usually result from local residents contacting ward officers, contacting Councillors and saying, ‘look, I'm scared about this intersection, can you please do something about it’. The way it works in Council is that you can get these things done. I had one lady specifically asking for a splitter on a corner which was a gradient —graded like this. She was so concerned about traffic crashing through her wall

that she had to place the bed of her child on the opposite wall to the house so that if a car did come through the wall it may not strike her. We were able to fix that for her, and that's going in in this budget—$75,000, well worth it. Madam Chairman, the feedback I've received to date from infrastructure spending in this budget from my residents has been very positive. I'm pleased to commend Councillor COOPER for her Chairmanship, and the departmental officers who also work so hard for the people of Brisbane. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor STRUNK. Councillor STRUNK: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on Program 2, specifically on some of the work in regards to traffic signals and road resurfacing, and I'll start with traffic signals first, if I can. My ward, or the old Richlands Ward, had an intersection on Archerfield, Azalea and Pine Road, that has been listed for a traffic signal intersection for some years. I know the former Councillor, Milton Dick, had it on his wish list for many a year and I believe it's also, of course, on the Federal Government's blackspot list as well. Now, I've received a bit of funding for planning last year, I think it was about $370,000, and I noticed when the booklet came out that $246,000 of that has been carried over this year, so I'm just not sure what's going on there. There has also been an additional $800,000, that may actually include the $246,000 carryover, but there's $800,000 now listed for that upgrade, and I'm just not sure what that's actually going to cover. If we just listen to Councillor McKENZIE, he said that of course he had one that was going to be about $2 million to do and so, I'm just not sure, and maybe the Chair can talk to that particular project, just to give me an understanding of what that's actually going to cover. But traffic signals continue to be an issue with a lot of the residents in my ward. Recently, the Wallaroo Way and Blunder Road residents in Doolandella undertook a petition to ask for traffic signals to be erected in this intersection, and the reason they've done that is because it's becoming ever-increasingly dangerous, because of the widening of course, or the upgrade of Blunder Road some years ago of course, there's more and more traffic and that's obviously the reason why it was widened, which was great. But it's also caused a problem with residents from Doolandella to try get out onto Blunder Road. So they initiated the petition asking for this to happen, and there's been many hundreds of people that have actually signed. The local Neighbourhood Watch has actually undertaken the petition, so we'll be delivering that to Council Chambers at the next session. Council officers have also identified this intersection as one that needs to be undertaken. Unfortunately, while as I say, I put it on my wish list, but there's no money coming forward, from this budget anyways, for design, let alone the installation of traffic signals. If any of the Councillors here are ever out that way, just pull into Wallaroo Way and then try to get back out. It doesn't matter what time of the day it is, you'll have trucks and cars coming from the left, coming from the right, and it's also a U-turn intersection as well. So you've really got to be on your toes. I avoid that intersection as often as I can. Councillor McKENZIE talked about schools and the issues around schools, Grand Avenue State School, is I think, it's the second-largest in population in Queensland in a primary school. I know former Councillor OWEN had done a lot of work around this school. Traffic management plans and also refuges out on Woogaroo Street and Grand Avenue. Which did help, I'll give you, it helped. But with the advent of the 197 townhouses that have just been built down Roxwell Street, and their school is Grand Avenue—talking to the principal of that school, he's going to add at least another two classrooms, maybe another three and of course, the children will probably want to be able to walk because

they're only a few hundred metres away, and they'll be walking across an intersection that is heavily traversed with heavy vehicle traffic, as well as cars, especially at peak school hours. So that's another intersection that I again put on the list for consideration, and I hope Council, at least in the next coming short period of time, will maybe give some money to that for at least a design. Now, moving along to road resurfacing, I suppose I'm in a ward that has a lot of shorter streets and then a few longer streets, if I can put it that way. We have connector roads and then just really residential roads. We were fortunate some years ago, about 60 years ago I suppose, when the roads in Inala were first being done, that they used a very high spec, and so those roads have lasted some 50 and 60 years. It's only now that a lot of the connector roads, especially the large connector roads that carry a lot of traffic, are needing to be resurfaced. A few of those will be undertaken this year in the road resurfacing schedule, but probably not enough. And so I just wanted to highlight that, that I'll be putting on my list again for next year those connector roads, and the reason I'm doing it is because the shorter roads, I suppose in some respects, don't carry as much traffic, so the impact isn't as great on them, but the large connector roads that I have right throughout my ward, really do take a beating and need to really be looked after. I'll finish my comments there. Thank you, Madam Chair. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor MATIC. Councillor MATIC: Thanks, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak in regards to Program 2 and particularly the road surfacing program. I listen with quiet interest to those opposite, and I'm actually quite surprised, Madam Chairman, at the comments they've made, because they seem to have forgotten, it's this LORD MAYOR that's provided a record investment of $360 million over four years, Madam Chairman, within this roads program. Madam Chairman, when you look at the roads program in previous years, you're looking at an average spend of about $60 million a year, but under our LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK we're getting $90 million a year, and yet from those opposite we hear as if we're getting cuts. We hear from those opposite that they didn't get exactly the streets they wanted, so boohoo, Madam Chairman, it's not good enough for them. I find it absolutely amazing, when you look at the breadth of what officers have done within this road surfacing program to get that list together, the LORD MAYOR looked at 2,000 streets, Madam Chairman, across this city as part of his election commitment, and that was across all wards. You listen to Councillor GRIFFITHS before, and he goes you know, ‘it's all about the LNP’. Well, Madam Chairman, it's this LORD MAYOR that cares about the city as a whole, that provides funding to all Councillors within this Chamber, on both sides of the Chamber, and made sure that he made a commitment that that money was spent across the whole city. It's this LORD MAYOR, Madam Chairman, that gets what Council is all about, and provides the level of investment we need to address our roads across our city, because it's his commitment, to making sure that we have smoother suburban streets, that we deal with the issue of traffic congestion, and that we deal with the issue of road safety as well by doing that. We made sure, Madam Chairman, as an Administration, that Asset Services officers went to all Councillors on both sides of the Chamber, asking them as part of this process, what their priorities and commitments were. And pulling that list together, looking at it across the whole city to address all of those priorities as needed. Now, Madam Chairman, this is a four-year program, so if they didn't get all the streets they wanted off their wish list this year, well, like all Councillors in this Chamber, you have the ability to put that bit up again for next year.

But I can't believe the rubbish that I hear from those opposite when they miss the point of what this program is all about, Madam Chairman, and they pretend when they walk into this Chamber, to come up with all these reasons why we're not supporting roads across this whole city. To say that we're not is an absolute joke, and it's a farce, Madam Chairman, because they obviously can't read the numbers within the budget book. They can't see the pages and pages of roads that were listed within the schedules for road resurfacing, Madam Chairman, and they sit there and pretend that the program is not getting to them as well. This Administration is getting on with delivering this important program across the city for the benefit of all Brisbane residents, and making sure that we're delivering on those core services that's clearly reflected in this Chamber, clearly reflected in the record investment that this LORD MAYOR has made, and clearly reflected in the budget book as well, Madam Chairman, because that speaks volumes as to what the truth is, not from what we hear from those opposite. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor WYNDHAM. Councillor WYNDHAM: Madam Chair, I rise to speak on Infrastructure Brisbane, Program 2. I'm absolutely amazed at what I hear sometimes, and Councillor SUTTON, as you indicated, yes, you've been here a long time, but you probably haven't learnt to listen. And in listening, I heard Councillor CUMMING talk about 200-plus streets, short streets, being resurfaced, and he said this is terrible. Then he talked about the long streets, and he named the number and it was 200-plus as well. So am I not listening right, that one-third of the streets were short, one-third of the streets were long? What's that leave? A third of the streets in the middle. Bloody—sorry, even. Councillors interjecting. Councillor WYNDHAM: It is crazy to think they're debating that. I would have thought he'd get up and say ‘this is disgraceful, we're spending too much money on long streets’. Well, it just happens that that's the way it is because long streets cost more. But Madam Chair, Councillor SUTTON, also in the time you should have by now learnt, that you don't, I guess, push for what you want, but you push for what you need, what is deliverable, what is achievable, and you will get results. I heard also a quote from the other side about spending on quality infrastructure— Kingsford Smith Drive, quality. A long time ago, I was told by a Councillor by the name of Janet Cooper, that you spend well, because your first expense is always going to be your worst expense, unless you have to come back and redo it. That Councillor became the Mayor of South Melbourne. She was my grandmother, but she taught me a lesson when I was young, buy well and buy once. That's what we're doing. Madam Chair, I hear talk about LATMs. Well, I have an LATM, I'm sorry, going in my area, because it was a need, not a want. It was something that we needed for residents, wildlife, and I guess to restrict some traffic through an area. I'm pleased about that, and this budget delivers, and in that delivery of course, I look back through my—what we call our wish list, and I see probably 90% of what I've requested, will be achieved. There's several more years in this term, and each year I will chip away at my election commitments. That's the way to achieve. Hamilton Road and Beckett Road intersection upgrade, Madam Chair, go back a long, long time, when the LORD MAYOR was the Infrastructure Chair, and we built Hamilton Road, much to the baying and the screaming of those on the other side. Now the people that represented those on the other side are baying and screaming to have more lanes on the same road. So we're upgrading an intersection. I don't discriminate, I'm happy to look after 100% of the electorate.

We upgraded Bridgeman and Beckett Roads, $120 million. We resurfaced Beckett Road and Rode Road. All of these things were done over time, and now we're getting on with upgrading Hamilton and Beckett Roads. Trouts Road and Rode Road intersection upgrade, something that I sat and planned, went to officers, it will be happening. Coleridge Street and Appleby Road, a small job which is something that means something to the locals, and will improve traffic flow. South Pine Road and Barton Street, the same thing, a small job that will improve traffic flow. Flockton Street, a corridor modernisation, where we're improving the corridor, putting in some pedestrian refuges, and making it better for pedestrians, traffic and cyclists. The interesting one of course, is that everyone wants an upgrade of South Pine Road and Stafford Road, and I just have to keep telling people it was planned under Campbell Newman, but it's not being delivered under Annastacia Palaszczuk. Shame, shame, shame, when you consider it's one of the worst intersections for time travelling from the northside. It absolutely destroys traffic flow from the areas of Albany Creek, and further out where there's lots of new development. So Madam Chair, I ask those on the other side to look at what you need, not what you want, more so what your residents need, not what you want. And Councillor CASSIDY, I was very pleased three weeks ago, to be able to ride on a road that was resurfaced. I'm glad that my complaining in the Chamber got you working. It's a great thing. Now all we've got to do is get you on your bike, because when you ride your bike around, you'll find so many little things that you can work with the public with. And while you're all sitting over there, just make sure you listen to your leader, because three thirds, when you add them together, tend to be close to 100%. Thank you. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor ALLAN. Councillor ALLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to enter the debate and speak on the valuable work that is identified and achieved through Program 2 – Infrastructure for Brisbane. As Brisbane's population grows, it is critical that our transport network enables the efficient and sustainable movement of people, freight, and services to not only support our economic development, and creation of new jobs, but also crucially, our lifestyle and leisure opportunities. This program not only supports our smoother suburban streets program, which benefits our local communities, but also major traffic congestion projects such as the Kingsford Smith Drive project, the Inner City Bypass project, and Wynnum Road. Kingsford Smith Drive particularly is of benefit to residents who live on the northside, including those in Northgate Ward, and in particular those who travel in the vicinity of the TradeCoast and airport precincts. With respect to Outcome 2.1, Roads and Transport Network Management, Madam Chairman, at the risk of repeating points made by previous speakers, there are a couple of elements of this program that I'd like to specifically highlight, because all wards and our communities benefit. Firstly, this Administration's smoother suburban streets program will see another $90 million invested across the city, to the benefit of all residents and visitors. This not only improves safety and driver comfort, it also adds to the overall amenity of our streets. Expenditure on road resurfacing is complemented by additional funding of over $13 million to complete kerb and channel upgrades. Residents are very appreciative of these works, and regularly commend Council once these projects are completed. This is a function of the communication they receive prior to the works commencing, and the quality of the completed project. The Partnering for Safer Schools initiative continues to enhance safety around our schools in a

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 156 practical fashion that encourages Active School Travel, and supports healthy lifestyles. Madam Chairman, Projects Attacking Congestion is another key expenditure item that benefits the whole community, by alleviating congestion and improving safety across the city, and I am pleased to see that a significant number of projects are planned across the city, that include installation of traffic signals at key intersections, upgrading of pedestrian crossings, line markings and signage changes. The list goes on. Council's highly visible, and now well-known, Portable Flashing Speed Warning signs have been a significant success, and are widely supported by the community. It is particularly pleasing to see funding maintained as demand continues to grow. These signs are now complemented by the new Flashing LED Warning signs for use at blackspot locations. Councillors have been provided with $28,000 to install these in key locations in their wards. Touching upon Outcome 2.2, Parking Management. To complement the significant range of deliverables, the program also has oversight of the city's parking management activities, including management of Council's managed parking stations, on-street parking meters and parking permits. From a Northgate Ward perspective, funding has been made available to complete a number of key public safety upgrades that I'll elaborate on. Traffic signals will be installed on Shaw Road, near the entrance to the Shaw Road playing fields. This is a very popular sporting precinct, and is the point where the Kedron Brook Bikeway crosses Shaw Road. Shaw Road is a very busy suburban access road that carries significant vehicular traffic in peak periods. The combination of heavy traffic and recreational users, many of them schoolchildren, makes for an extremely unsafe zone. Installation of traffic lights will significantly improve safety for people, pedestrians and cyclists seeking to cross Shaw Road, and will improve safety for vehicles entering and exiting the Shaw Park sporting facilities. Another key project is the signalisation of the intersection of Newman Road and Main Avenue at Wavell Heights. This has long been a safety hotspot, with regular accidents, and a fatality in recent years. The project will improve public safety for the many thousands of motorists, pedestrians, and cyclists who use this intersection daily. Both of these projects have been needed for a number of years, and I am pleased that this Administration will progress these projects to completion. Additionally, upgrade works will be undertaken at the intersection of Toombul Road and Wellington Road, which has been identified as a traffic blackspot. From a smoother suburban streets perspective, over 30 streets, Councillor CUMMING, short and long, across the Northgate Ward have been earmarked for road resurfacing. Nine of these streets will also have kerb and channel upgrades. A number of these resurfacing projects will improve safety around school zones. Northgate Ward is playing catch-up, after the neglect of the previous ALP Councillor, and I think Councillor KING's reflection on a discussion she had with Councillor Flesser, some years ago, was informative—where he advised “It is far easier to do nothing than to deliver”. Continuing, two projects to support the Administration's Safe School Travel and Safe Routes to School program will be undertaken at Tenth Avenue, Kedron, and Langton Street, Banyo. These projects will support student safety for Kedron State Primary School and Earnshaw State College respectively. The portable flashing speed warning signs have been a major success across the ward, and have had a direct impact on reducing driver speeds. The ability to continue the rollout of these signs is welcomed, and I know that the community is appreciative of the Council's efforts in this regard. To complement the portable flashing speed warnings signs, we now have the flashing LED warning signs for blackspots. The first of these was installed in

Gympie Street at Northgate, and I look forward to being able to install more of these across the ward in coming years. Before completing my speech, I can't really miss the opportunity to touch on Councillor GRIFFITHS' comments regarding open level crossings. In Northgate we have two open level crossings. We're conscious that these are a State Government infrastructure, and it is their responsibility to lead these projects, certainly from a funding perspective. It is clear from recent comments by the Deputy Premier, and the recent State budget, that open level crossings are not a priority. Can I suggest that Councillor GRIFFITHS takes these concerns to the State ALP down the road, and come back to this Chamber once he has a positive response. In conclusion, I would like to thank the LORD MAYOR and Councillor COOPER, for their continued and crucial support in investing in the infrastructure that our growing city needs. I would also like to thank the many Council officers who have contributed to this program. I commend this very extensive and important program to the Chamber. Thank you. Chairman: Councillor WINES.

ADJOURNMENT: 652/2016-17 At that time, 3.13pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Steven TOOMEY, that the meeting adjourn for a period of 15 minutes, to commence only when all Councillors had vacated the Chamber and the doors have been locked.

UPON RESUMPTION:

Chairman: Further debate? LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR: Well, thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I'm very, very pleased to enter the debate for this program, because it's a program which, if you like, in dollar terms, registers a very significant contribution to this city through some of the major projects. It is of course the program that drives some of those very big and very key pieces of work in our city, Kingsford Smith Drive, Inner City Bypass. Madam Chairman, the Telegraph Road project and the advancement of Wynnum Road, they're four of what are very significant projects within this program. Now, I did note that Councillor SUTTON was suggesting that year after year it's about carryover, carryover, carryover. I would suggest it would be more a case of year after year, from those opposite of carry on, carry on, carry on. But Madam Chairman, she did say— Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: She did say that she had $100 to put on the table and Madam Chairman, it was a bit of a case of ‘I've got the money, honey, if you've got the time’, to explain about how these carryovers might be occurring. Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: Look, I've contemplated that proposal, and during the contemplation of that however, it occurred to me that there is an outstanding commitment from last year's budget. The project of Lytton, Thorpe, and Apollo intersection came ringing back to my ears. I remember there was a proposal on the table on that occasion, Madam Chairman, for a kiss if it was delivered. As I've said before, I don't care which cheek Councillor SUTTON wants to deliver it on, and I've got four.

Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: So I'm afraid before I can consider the proposal currently before me with the $100, I really have to wait for the delivery of promised accounts of the past. But Madam Chairman, Councillor CUMMING seemed to think that he'd got the short straw in this budget. He was very much focused on everything short. I went looking through the budget and I thought well, this can't be right, surely, and I found Clara Street, or Clara Street I think it's pronounced, in Wynnum, $216,000. I found Cusack Parade at Wynnum at $128,000; Freight Street at Lytton at $212,000; and Wilde Street, Wynnum, $347,000, just on a quick glance. There were many other streets, but they were just a quick glance. Now, Madam Chairman, these streets are more endowed with length than what Councillor CUMMING is prepared to give them credit for. The reality is that Councillor CUMMING here in his speech today, has tried to give people who live in short streets a complex. I have to say, quite frankly, that people who live in short streets have got rights too, and I'm going to, Madam Chairman, in this city I will stand up for short-streeted people every day of the week, because they too have a right to share in this budget, and the streets deserve to be resurfaced, and they have been, along with many other streets. But of course, it's also a time in this budget to consider the forgotten people and speak up for those who can't speak, or at least decided not to turn up and speak, and that is of course referring to the Councillor for Tennyson. Now, I thought well, has she been given the short straw, and I've had a look and I saw Honour Avenue here at $543,000 in Graceville. Councillors interjecting. LORD MAYOR: I saw, I flicked over, there's Glenshaw Street, Chelmer. Chelmer rings a bell— $84,000. I went over to Douglas Street, Yeronga, at $63,000. Fraser Street, Graceville, $80,000. Oh and here's one, the Brisbane Corso, $318,000, Madam Chairman. Apollo Street, Yeronga at $48,000. So there's a substantial sum. So, none of them seem to me to be particularly short streets. Apollo—or Athol Street, rather, not Apollo, Athol Street, Yeronga, might be getting on the shorter side, but at $48,000 that's still I think a reasonable length street. So Madam Chairman, there are all sorts of streets. There's long streets, there's short streets, there's kerbed streets, Madam Chairman, there's all sorts of streets that have been given—straight streets have even been given a go in this budget. So Madam Chairman, there is the point of it, that the important thing is there's $90 million worth of them in this budget. And there was $90 million last year, and there'll be $90 million next year, and there'll be $90 million the year after, Madam Chairman, in line with our commitments. Now, Councillor GRIFFITHS raised the issue of open level crossings, and that's fair enough. I suppose you can raise these matters. Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: You've heard it all before? Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: He's not here. He's not here so you don't have to hear anything more from him, but you can hear a little bit from me. Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: So you might be able to pass the message on. You see, Madam Chairman, it was talking about all the money going to the northside or something and about— what was the word he used? Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: What's the word he used?

Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: Pork-barrelling, that's right. Pork-barrelling. So Madam Chairman, the reality is in terms of the open level crossing projects on the northside, they were State-led and sponsored. They were State-led and sponsored. We had given a previous commitment on those particular projects to be prepared to go in 50-50. Once they said we are going to do those projects, we said okay, but we will go 50-50 because we'd made a previous commitment around those particular projects. But our traditional spend has been 15%. But I'd just say this again, whether it's northside, southside, eastside, westside, where there are open level crossings they are State-sponsored projects—always will be. Now, Madam Chairman, we've indicated, and I continue to indicate, that there will be 15% on the table whenever the State say they want to do an open level crossing. There'll probably be some argy-bargy around that—well, I guess there will, simply because we've been big-hearted, Madam Chairman, in terms of a couple of projects. But the traditional spend, right back through all sorts of political colours in this place, Madam Chairman, has been 15% is our contribution towards those. I look at Melbourne and I look at other places, particularly Melbourne at the moment, Madam Chairman, where there is I think around 50 open level crossings being done. They're not being done by councils down there, they're being done by the state government, Madam Chair. Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: And so, Madam Chairman— Councillor interjecting. LORD MAYOR: Well, they're getting the job done, Councillor. They're getting the job done. So Madam Chairman, all these things at the end of the day cost money, and the Labor Party seem to think that you can do all these things, keep your rates down lower, lower, lower, but again, all I've heard today, all I've heard all day is spend more, spend more, spend more, and of course, that just does not add up. Madam Chairman, in terms of the open level crossings, can I just say to all of you, because we've had it tested, none of them have a benefit-cost ratio anywhere near what Kingsford Smith Drive has, anywhere near what Wynnum Road has, anywhere near what Telegraph Road has, and anywhere near what the Inner City Bypass will produce either. They just do not rate, Madam Chairman. I use the Coopers Plains open level crossing all the time, it's out here where I live, and Madam Chairman, is there a delay when you go through there? Yes, there is, of course there is. But Madam Chairman, when you add the cost of those delays against the cost of the project, vis-à-vis the spend on other projects, it is poles apart. I love this reference that Councillor SRI had earlier about we're only getting Kingsford Smith Drive to make a quick trip for people to go to the airport. Well, that is just an absolute nonsense. It's not about people going to the airport, it's about a recognition that that road carries 15% of freight traffic, it is a very significant economic driver in this city, and Madam Chairman, it's one of the reasons why it has achieved the benefit-cost ratio that it has. Madam Chairman, it is of course a great employer by way of the Australia TradeCoast, and indeed the airport itself is expected to employ 40,000 people over the years to come. So they're big issues, Madam Chairman, for our city to address, and we will continue to address them, not to mention of course, the Hamilton Northshore project, and the population growth that that is producing via the State Government's development there. So Madam Chairman, this is a good program. I thank Councillor COOPER for her ongoing work in this program. She has the job of delivering, and that she is doing. Madam Chairman, I thank the officers also involved. There is a great wealth of talent we have in this place, they are people that have built up terrific

engineering capability and capacity because we've done big projects. In many ways, it has been the fact that we've done it that has kept talent in this place, and I salute them for all that they do. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor HOWARD. Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'd like to speak briefly today on why I support Budget 2017-18, initiatives in Program 2 – Infrastructure for Brisbane. Madam Chairman, I'm proud to be part of a team that is committed to delivering the critical infrastructure for our city, a team that is taking real action on traffic congestion, delivering smoother suburban streets, and making our city more liveable for a better tomorrow. Madam Chairman, today I would like to focus on two important areas within Program 2. The first one deals with one of my major election commitments to deliver smoother suburban streets. Madam Chairman, nobody likes a bumpy ride, which is why I'm delighted that this budget commits $90 million to making our streets smoother and safer. In Central Ward, where the road network is amongst the most heavily used in our city, this is very, very welcome. The second initiative I'd like to mention is the river-based leisure and tourism infrastructure program. This initiative, Madam Chairman, in my opinion, is the icing on the cake for Central Ward. Brisbane is the river city, and with works now underway on the transformation of both Howard Smith and Queen's Wharf, both in my ward, this is an exciting opportunity to allow more people to not only make the most of our river, but it also opens the door to encourage more people to visit the spectacular Moreton and Stradbroke Islands. By opening up public moorings in the city centre as well as New Farm and Dutton Park, people will be able to go directly from the CBD to the islands, instead of having to negotiate their way out to Pinkenba, Cleveland or Fisherman Island. These moorings will also allow for private boat owners to drop off and pick up passengers and park short-term, allowing more people to stop and enjoy restaurants, shops and other activities along the river's edge. Madam Chairman, I congratulate and thank Councillor COOPER for her leadership of the Brisbane Infrastructure portfolio, and I thank all the Council officers who are laying the foundations for Brisbane's future, and ensuring we maintain our status as Australia's New World City. Madam Chairman, it would be remiss of me not to make comment on what others in this place have had to say about this budget, in particular, what the Leader of the Opposition has had to say. Now, there is very little said in this Chamber by the Leader of the Opposition that I agree with, but in his response to the budget, there was one line which I wholeheartedly endorse. In his response, and I quote, he said, ‘they have made a big deal out of core Council business like filling potholes’. Well yes, Madam Chair, we have, and I'm proud that we have, because delivering core Council services is why we are here in the first place. If we didn’t, we would not be doing our job. You would expect that someone who was part of the last Labor administration, would understand that one of the key reasons they were booted out of office was the fact Brisbane was suffering from a severe pothole plague under their reign. It's clear that those behind me still haven't learnt their lesson. The ratepayers of Brisbane demand Council pay attention to, act on, and deliver good core services. They want smoother roads and safer streets and that's why I'm proud that this budget, and this Administration continues to make a big deal about core Council services. Madam Chairman, this is a budget that keeps Brisbane on the right track. It is another example of an enthusiastic and energetic LNP Council that has a strong vision, a fully-costed and affordable vision, an exciting vision for Brisbane's future, and I commend the program to the Chamber.

Chairman: Councillor HUANG.

At that time, 3.44pm, the Deputy Chairman, Councillor Vicki HOWARD, assumed the Chair.

Councillor HUANG: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to enter the debate on Program 2 of the 2017-18 Budget on Infrastructure for Brisbane. Madam Chair, the 2017-18 Budget is indeed a budget on delivery of infrastructure for this city. As the LORD MAYOR stated in his budget speech, ‘I make no apologies for making sure that our city keeps pace in regards to infrastructure delivery’. Indeed, Madam Chair, we make no apologies for delivering the infrastructure that is needed to keep our city moving, by tackling the traffic congestion and maintaining the superior lifestyle we currently enjoy. But Madam Chair, as I was reading through the details of this budget, I feel the residents of Brisbane deserve an apology, an apology from this ALP State Government. While Council's 2017-18 Budget focused strongly on the infrastructure that would tackle traffic congestion and maintain our enviable lifestyle, we saw the ALP State Government simply shrug off their responsibilities in addressing the infrastructure that is so desperately needed to tackle the grid lock on major arterial roads, or overcrowded schools and hospitals. Instead this Labor State Government has decided to throw $500 million, as part of their election strategy, including building two new inner city high schools that won't be needed until 2031, to boost the chance Jackie Trad’s political survival, and ignore the desperate needs for the suburban schools that are already far beyond capacity to accommodate the growing school community. Madam Chair, just take Macgregor Ward, for example, I have two of the biggest primary schools in Queensland, MacGregor State School and Warrigal Road State School. Both schools were designed to accommodate around 600 students. But currently, both schools have more than 1,300 students and are growing. I’ve previously raised in this Chamber, and moved a motion, to call the State Government to come to the table with the Council, in co-funding the MacGregor State School drop-and-go facility, which is a State responsibility. But so far, we are still waiting to hear back from the State Government. Since Councillor GRIFFITHS is so keen for getting State projects, rather than Council projects done in his ward, I would suggest he should publicly challenge the ineffective State member for Sunnybank in the next State election. I think if Councillor GRIFFITHS has the courage to become the State member —he may have the courage to actually commit to a State project, unless he's just paying a lip service. Madam Chair, on the contrast, on page 30 of the budget book, this Council is firmly committed to co-fund its State Government project, once the State Government decides on its preferred design. Just before the last school holidays I was approached by the principal of Warrigal Road State School, to discuss the issue of staff parking. I actually found it odd. When did Council become responsible for State School staff parking? Councillor interjecting. Councillor HUANG: This is an issue caused by an overcrowded school community, and the State Government has no interest in addressing the long overdue demands of their own schools in the suburbs but is spending money to build new schools, that won’t be needed until 2031 for political purposes. Madam Chair, on 28 March this year, I moved another motion in this Chamber, calling on the State Government to jointly fund the Player Street connection with Council. Once again, Minister Bailey, despite acknowledging the needs of the local residents, which he used to represent, and the role Kessels Road plays

in this important road upgrade, he has shrugged off the responsibility and refused to support this important infrastructure. It is unfortunate that this ALP State Government does not take traffic and pedestrian safety into consideration, and commit to co-fund this project. But I'd like to take this opportunity to once again thank the State member for Mansfield, Ian Walker MP, for his continuing support in lobbying TMR (Department of Transport and Main Roads), for the joint funding for this vital project. Madam Chair, on the contrast, this Council has, in our ability, committed to delivering the infrastructure for Brisbane residents. In this year's budget, $8.745 million has been allocated to progress the Player Street connection project. This Council understands the needs of the local residents, and acknowledges the importance of traffic safety and efficiency. We just can't turn a blind eye and sit on our hands and let the traffic worsen through this important traffic corridor. This budget addresses both citywide and local infrastructure needs. It will provide significant relief to the traffic congestion in our city. I would like to conclude by thanking Councillor COOPER, and her officers, for their dedication in planning a road network that provides safe and efficient movement of people and goods, by the most appropriate modes and routes, and call on the State Government, to put people first and work with Council in delivering the infrastructure that will prepare our city, our region, for the future. I commend the program to the Chamber. Deputy Chairman: Further debate? Councillor OWEN. Councillor OWEN: Thank you, Madam Deputy Chairman. I rise in support of Program 2 of the budget, and it is with pleasure that I would like to stand today and correct the record, because I think earlier today Councillor GRIFFITHS may have been in a parallel universe, saying that there's a lack of delivery for the southside of Brisbane. This is not true, Madam Deputy Chairman. The fact that he has not got one project funded in his ward does not mean that the southside has been neglected by this Administration. In fact, the opposite is true. Realistically, the expectation that he has for Council to fund that particular project, his expectations should be thrust onto the State Government up in George Street, because it is their level crossing. That is where the initiative needs to commence, not here. Now, the other interesting thing that has come out today in respect of the budget, is the South-West News. I'm very concerned that there are reflections in this particular article that reflect on Program 2.1.2.1, and in particular, Progress Road Stage 4, and Stapylton Road, and the Johnson Road intersection upgrade, because it says in the article on page 5 today ‘Major Road Upgrades and Improvements to Parks On the Way—Major road upgrades in the South-West were among the big ticket items in the 2017-18 Brisbane City Council Budget. Stage 4 at the Progress Road upgrade at Wacol received $25.1 million, while the nearby Stapylton Road and Johnson Road intersection at Heathwood received $10.4 million for an upgrade’. Now that is the delivery of the LORD MAYOR and Councillor COOPER, and thank you very much from the people on the southside. But the thing that concerns me is that there is a quote in here from Councillor STRUNK saying, he insisted his continuous advocating had secured the road upgrades. Now, Madam Deputy Chairman, this is where the record needs to be corrected — Councillor interjecting. Councillor OWEN: —because we have to get the facts straight. Let me just go on to Progress Road because, you know, we have got it there with a major capital injection this year. But the design funding for Progress Road Stage 4, was done in 2015-16

financial year, and the funds were in the 2016-17 forwards in the budget book on page 62. So this was well before Councillor STRUNK was elected— Councillors interjecting. Councillor OWEN: —before he was elected, and therefore there is nothing there that he has done in the past, in relation to getting that project forward. Now, I know Councillor Milton Dick, when he was in this place was a strong advocate for Progress Road, so credit where credit is due. He did advocate for his ward. But Johnson and Stapylton Road intersection upgrade is something that I have been working on, in conjunction with my Councillor colleagues on the other side of the city border in Logan, for a number of years. Madam Deputy Chairman, I'd just like to reflect on the hard work that went in on behalf of those Logan Councillors, like Councillor Lynne Clarke, who was a former Councillor, and also the current Councillor, Councillor Laurie Smith. When we go back to some of the media articles in relation to this intersection, from 10 June 2009, this is just after I was elected, but the history from Councillor Lynne Clarke is very interesting because she said, I was told—and I’m quoting here—‘I was told when I was elected in 1997, that by 2005 it would be done’. Councillor Clarke said she didn't know why Brisbane City Council had delayed in agreeing to be involved in the upgrade, but thought it was because they hadn't seen it as a priority. Now, back in the 1990s and early 2000s, we had a Labor administration in this place. We had a Labor Councillor in that area, and so they didn't see it as a priority. Since being elected, I have certainly seen it as a priority and I know the LORD MAYOR has seen it as a priority. Councillor interjecting. Deputy Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, please allow Councillor OWEN to deliver her speech. Thank you, Councillor SUTTON. Councillor OWEN. Councillor interjecting. Councillor OWEN: It is interesting because if Councillor SUTTON had really listened to some of the things I've said in this place, that the Johnson and Stapylton Road upgrade had been put in the budget, but was sacrificed because of all the rehabilitation we had to do as a result of the 2011 floods. Councillors interjecting. Councillor OWEN: That is why it had been delayed, and if you had listened to my comments in previous weeks, you would know that I have said in this place that I thank my residents for being patient and understanding about all the remediation and rehabilitation work that had to go on in other parts of the city, which is why this project was reprioritised, to make the urgent necessities of the other roads the priority, because those roads were severely damaged by flood, and those roads had to be fixed immediately. That is why I am pleased to say that we are not talking about design work for this project. It is happening in this financial year and, Madam Deputy Chairman, this particular intersection upgrade adds to the other upgrades in that vicinity, in that stretch, that create a major, major corridor. So there's a $55 million Blunder Road deviation, the $18 million Stapylton Road upgrade, the new facilities that are in between the Logan Motorway on Stapylton, and Johnson Road, and now this upgrade. So now what we will see is between Johnson Road, the Logan Motorway, and all the way up to the Ipswich Motorway, an absolutely clear arterial corridor for people to traverse from the city outskirts, right through to some of the western suburbs, and also to head into other areas of the city and access multiple motorways, which is really, really important.

Madam Deputy Chairman, I'd also like to put a reflection on the Inland Rail network comment that Councillor GRIFFITHS made. This is a project that we are still waiting for the State Government to declare a clear corridor on. So until that happens, there is a lot that needs to be discussed, and we need to take it through a step-by-step process, because until we can actually get confirmation, nothing is going ahead. I'd also like to reflect on some other program services in the budget and, in particular, Service 2.1.4.1. This is in regards to the portable flashing speed warning signs. Through you, Madam Deputy Chair, to Councillor COOPER, I would like to say a very big thank you for the Council officers who have worked diligently on this project, and really assessed the appropriate locations for these speed warning signs, and made sure that they are going in the correct places, because it's all too easy to say we should have one here or we should have one there, but there are a lot of technicalities including underground services like pipelines which may inhibit the opportunities to put these signs in particular locations. So it is very important that we don’t have a knee-jerk reaction when we are requested for one of these signs. We need to be conscious that the traffic engineers have a job to do—and can I say, through you Madam Deputy Chairman to Councillor COOPER—those Council officers do a great job. I would like to say as well, I have a number of them that I have installed as permanent locations on major arterial roads that go through my suburbs. What we did was we actually have the two bases so that they can be switched directions. We have that opportunity to have that permanent status of a speed warning sign. I must say, the feedback I have had from local residents in respect to these signs has always been positive when they've been installed, because they do slow the traffic down. It is very much that conscious reminder and, particularly, with the difficulties we have with driver behaviour. I'm sure every Councillor in this place would know that from time-to-time we— Deputy Chairman: Councillor OWEN, your time has expired. Councillor OWEN: Thank you Madam Deputy Chair. Deputy Chairman: Is there any further debate? Councillor COOPER, could you please close the debate? Councillor COOPER: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. On the stroke of 4pm, I'm happy to respond to some of the comments that have been made, as beautifully promised by our Whip. Can I say that it has been an interesting debate. I've seen there's been a range of feedback. I would, before making any comments in response to the debate, like to thank all of the officers that deliver such a fantastic outcome for Program 2.

Councillor COOPER: From the Divisional Manager, Scott Stewart, down to the officers who are out there talking to us about portable speed warning signs, these officers do an outstanding job. I am absolutely thrilled with the efforts that they put in on behalf of Brisbane residents each and every day. I really do want to thank them for their genuine dedication to our city. So thank you to all of the officers, and I think that all Councillors would agree with me, that they are people that we work very closely with, and they deliver some great outcomes for us all. In relation to the debate, Councillor SUTTON, she was deriding a commitment to spend a billion dollars. Well, Councillor SUTTON, I'd just like to say we are really spending money, unlike the State Infrastructure Plan— Councillor SUTTON: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SUTTON.

Councillor SUTTON: Claim to be misrepresented. Chairman: Thank you. Councillor COOPER. Councillor COOPER: Well Councillor SUTTON, I wrote down that you said, ‘it was all spin and no substance’. So I would suggest that that is deriding a commitment to spend a million dollars—and I think a billion dollars is clear evidence of the commitment that we have made to the people of Brisbane. She said that—she went on to say that she had issues with a range of things, but I noted that she said that Wynnum Road was basically eight years overdue. I would like to apologise to Councillor SUTTON for the inconvenience of the floods in 2011. I apologise that because of the floods we were not able to progress this as— Councillors interjecting. Councillor COOPER: —we were proposing to do. So my humblest apologies. I'd also like to say, Councillor SUTTON, that perhaps if you're wanting people to get on with delivering projects they've committed to, you could talk to your State Government colleagues about delivering the Eastern and Northern Busways— Councillor interjecting. Councillor COOPER: —that they promised to deliver, and that we are experiencing right now the ramifications of them not delivering those projects. So let's be consistent, and let's make sure that everybody delivers on what they promise to deliver. In terms of saying that she thought KSD—Kingsford Smith Drive is gold-plated, this is the woman that was in 2008, sending out an industry letter to everybody, calling on Council to actually do Kingsford Smith Drive when she was out there writing to the industry, her industry briefing. Councillors interjecting. Councillor COOPER: So perhaps a little bit of inconsistency has been applied there, disappointingly. We also had Councillor SUTTON saying that the streets were paved with gold. Well perhaps if she encourages people to use CellOPark app, then everybody, all of her residents, will be able to actually signal when they commence utilising the parking meters. They can actually do it using their phone. They do not need to run back to make sure that they've paid correctly at the meter. They can actually do it all online, a brand new service that Council have been able to deliver, working with CellOPark. So that has been a huge step forward and I encourage all Councillors to promote that to their residents, and to all visitors in our city. So I was disappointed. I know that Councillor SUTTON is an advocate for the Wynnum Road project, but I also note that she again said that we're carrying money over. Well, we have to carry money over when we don't actually get, for example, land resumptions completed and the gazettal process also needs to be completed before we can commence work on these projects. That's about partnerships with other levels of governments, and I would say to her, please encourage other levels of government to work with us, to make sure we can deliver these important projects for our city. In relation to comments made by Councillor CUMMING—and the DEPUTY MAYOR said to me perhaps he suffers short project syndrome—in relation to whether they're long streets or short streets, I think we've really discussed that at length, Madam Chair. I would say to him that there are projects north, south, east and west. We do not discriminate in this Council Chamber. We deliver projects for all Brisbane residents. He was concerned about the LATM money. Well actually, two of those projects, so 20% of the LATM budget, is actually in his own ward. So I would say to him if he thinks that's terrible, 20% of that budget in his own ward, then I would hope to see success from him in terms of getting support for those projects. If he

does not get support for those projects, I'll be very, very disappointed, because he is a person that has been most critical of that particular project. Councillor SRI said that there was basically a black hole, in terms of we're concentrating only on funding roads. I think the LORD MAYOR pointed out quite clearly, we do not just build roads, we build infrastructure. That infrastructure includes bike lanes, pedestrian connections, and intersections for people to cross roads. It delivers for all of the modes and, in particular, it delivers for public transport. I note that Councillor SRI said that we need to do more. Particularly, I note that he's concerned about Montague Road, and absolutely, this is a really important corridor, and he would like that corridor to actually have a slower speed. But I also note for the Chamber, that this is a really important public transport corridor, so every week there are over 2,000 trips along that corridor. So that delivers access for nearly 900,000 passenger trips along that particular road corridor. So it isn't just about cars, it's actually about what it delivers for that wider context, and that's very much a public transport outcome. So I dispute his comment. I think we are absolutely committed to delivering better outcomes for all modes. Now, Councillor CASSIDY said—again here talking about short streets. It seems to be a bit of an obsession. He questioned why they need to be done. Well, I think all roads deserve to be considered on their merits. He then talked about Lemke Road. Now, this is not an issue to play politics with. This is a really tragic situation where a person lost their life. There's actually going to be — Councillor CASSIDY: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Claim to be misrepresented. Chairman: Councillor COOPER. Councillor COOPER: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. So Council absolutely has expressed its deepest sympathies to the family of the victim of this tragic accident. In fact, we have done what we can to try and immediately enhance pedestrian safety in this location. But we are awaiting a Coroner's report, and once that report is received by Council, as Councillor CASSIDY well knows, if there is a recommendation, we will be absolutely complying with whatever recommendation is made as a consequence of that report. We do not in any way, shape or form dismiss this. This is something that I am very, very keen to make sure that we get the right outcome, to make sure that our community is a safe one. So I'm disappointed that he seems to suggest we are not taking it seriously. We absolutely are, and Councillor CASSIDY has been kept informed the whole way. So that is the situation. Councillor GRIFFITHS said that we were pork-barrelling on the northside. Well, that is patently untrue. So I did a little bit of a quick survey. I looked through all of the schedules. I looked through my pages, I looked at Road Network Design. When I look at numbers of projects for northside and southside—so I played his game, I went northside, southside. Okay, so when I do Road Network Design, southside wins. When I do district projects, it is equal. It is equal, one each side. Then I did Road Access Network Improvements, 14 southside, and 12 northside. Southside wins. Okay, then I did Local Area Traffic Management traffic calming—six southside, four northside. Southside wins. Then I did new kerb and channel and kerb ramps construction. That was again a win for the southside. Councillor interjecting.

Councillor COOPER: I'm disappointed, really disappointed I have to say. Then I did Road Construction Minor Traffic Density. Five for the southside, four for the northside. Southside wins again, Madam Chair. Okay, then I did Suburban Corridor Modernisation, seven for the southside, six for the northside. Southside wins again. Councillors interjecting. Councillor COOPER: What is going on here? Then I did Congestion Busting Projects. Guess what, Madam Chair? 19 southside, 22 northside. Northside wins. Northside wins. Councillors interjecting. Councillor COOPER: It's exciting. So that is absolutely pathetic—then I did—from Councillor GRIFFITHS to try and suggest this nonsense with the congestion-busting projects, they're on the northside. So then a little win for the northside. Then I did Major Traffic Improvements for Intersections. Twelve on the southside, four on the northside. So again, a win for the southside. Then I did Safe School Travel. It’s equal, Madam Chair, four and four. So we're getting close. Then he had Safer Routes to School. Again, equal, two and two. So I would say to you, if I do a very cursory flick through this book, this book actually shows that we are distributing projects all over this city, and we don’t play silly games. We don’t say, ‘oh, all for the northside or for the southside’. We say projects of merits, projects that deliver for the people of this city. We, in everything we do, are trying to make sure that we balance up these sorts of things. If we had all the money in the world, Madam Chair, we would fund all the projects in the world, but we are realists, and we try and pick out the right projects, and we try and make sure we focus on all of the needs for Brisbane residents. So I thank the LORD MAYOR, I thank the officers, and I really do thank everybody, particularly also the Finance Chair, for delivering for Program 2. Thank you, Madam Chair. Chairman: Thank you Councillor COOPER. I will now put the motion for the— Councillor CASSIDY: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Oh sorry, Councillor SUTTON, misrepresentation. I had yours first. Councillor SUTTON: Madam Chair, Councillor COOPER said that I derided the budget allocation of a billion dollars to the infrastructure projects. I didn't deride the actual allocation. I derided this Administration's capacity to deliver on what they say they're going to deliver on. My point was that they wouldn’t spend a billion dollars on infrastructure projects this year, despite that being the budget— Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SUTTON. Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Never once, have I played politics, Madam Chair, in this place or out in the community— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor CASSIDY: With— Chairman: Order! Just a moment, please, Councillor CASSIDY. I'd just remind all Councillors that this particular point is in relation to a tragic circumstance. So I ask all Councillors to consider that with your behaviour and response to this.

Thank you. Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Thank you, Madam Chair. I never play politics with the issue of pedestrian safety on Lemke Road. I have been working very constructively with the officers, and with Councillor COOPER's office. I was simply saying that I'll continue to advocate for safe pedestrian crossings on that section of road. Chairman: Thank you. I'll now put the motion for the adoption of the Infrastructure for Brisbane Program.

Motion put: The Chairman submitted to the Chamber the motion for the adoption of the Infrastructure for Brisbane Program and it was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillor Andrew WINES, and Councillor Steven TOOMEY immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.

AYES: 25 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES, Norm WYNDHAM, and the Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK, and Shayne SUTTON.

The Chairman then called upon Councillor David McLACHLAN to present the Clean, Green and Sustainable City Program.

3. CLEAN, GREEN AND SUSTAINABLE CITY PROGRAM: 653/2016-17 Councillor David McLACHLAN, Chairman of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Norm WYNDHAM, that that for the services of the Council, the allocations for the Operations and the Projects for the year 2017-18 and the Rolling Projects for the Clean, Green and Sustainable City Program as contained on pages 38 to 72 and the indicative schedules on page 172 to 180 so far as they relate to Program 3, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor McLACHLAN. Councillor McLACHLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Before I talk to the allocations and the projects for the Clean, Green and Sustainable City, with your indulgence, I'd like to reflect briefly on the words just spoken, ‘for the services of the Council’, and to acknowledge a true servant of the Council, and the city, who sadly passed away earlier this month. Ross Cope was a key member of Council's Natural Environment Water and Sustainability branch, and worked for Council for over two decades. His peers say that Ross planted the sustainability seed for Council, and spent the best part of two decades lobbying and educating his colleagues, and the organisation, on what a sustainable city looks like. Ross drove the first State of the Environment report for Brisbane, established the Environmental Coordinator's Network, and Council's first Environmental

Management System. It was he, his colleagues have told me, who laid the foundation stone for our sustainability report card and plan, Brisbane. Clean, Green, Sustainable 2017-2031. Vale Ross, and thank you for your service. Madam Chairman, as Chairman of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee, I'm proud to continue our Administration's commitment to the environment, our biodiversity, delivering new projects that enhance our parks and provide access to great open spaces, maintaining our waterways, and continuing to deliver for Brisbane's residents. Being a clean, green and sustainable city is not achieved through bumper stickers campaigns. Not by chanting slogans in Kum ba ya circles. It means taking smart and practical decisions step-by-step and taken over time. I want to start at the headline objective for the program, a Clean, Green and Sustainable City. In the current financial year, this program has delivered in spades in relation to recognition of our sustainability objectives, winning Australia's Most Sustainable City award again, being crowned the clean air capital of Australia, and achieving carbon neutral operations. Madam Chairman, pages 38-72 of the 2017-18 Annual Plan and Budget, spell out a $583 million commitment to delivering a clean, green and sustainable outcome. It sees $131.2 million for waste management and resource recovery, and Councillor MATIC will talk to this shortly; $129.4 million on our urban parks networks to upgrade city parks, playgrounds, safety lighting, dog off leash areas and access to our bushland reserves; $94 million for major and local drainage maintenance, rehabilitation and enhancement, waterway vegetation management, and the residential flat assistance program; $15.3 million on recycling initiatives; and $5.9 million to continue on delivering a 100% carbon neutral city for offsets and energy efficient livers. It comprises 35 pillars, five outcomes—each with a well thought through and budgeted strategy and services for deliver. It starts, Madam Chairman, at Outcome 1, Program 3, Sustainable and Resilient Community. This Administration recognises that the Brisbane community, our residents, are at the heart and soul of our efforts to be a clean and green and sustainable city. We’ll continue to engage with the community, and deliver a wide range of Green Heart initiatives, including the ever popular Lord Mayor's Sustainability Photography Awards, Green Heart Fairs, and Free Native Plants Program. This year's budget will continue to see CitySmart measurably contribute to Council's environmental and economic development targets. With continued funding of over $500,000, CitySmart will continue to engage the corporate sector through networking events, to provide a platform to deliver Council's sustainability messages to the corporate sector, engaging with industry associations across the city and present them with a range of sustainability measures, and source partner sponsorship and exhibitor funding to lower the cost to Council-funded sustainability events and activities. CitySmart will continue its highly effective targeted sustainability messaging, reaching 100,000 residents each year, on a range of topics important to Council's operations, including food waste, transport, energy use, and water wastage. Madam Chairman, Brisbane's long history of community partnerships will continue with a $503,000 investment for our Habitat Brisbane, Creek Catchment Group and Wildlife Conservation partners. The Lord Mayor’s Community Sustainability and Environment Grants will continue to provide the ever-needed financial support to help volunteer sustainability endeavours. This Administration will continue to support the Native Animal Ambulance, rescuing sick, orphaned, injured wildlife across our large and vibrant city. Council will continue to provide information to Brisbane's community, to help them be resilient and adaptive to adverse natural events. Information will be fit for purpose, simple and accessible. Linking risk to actions to empower the Brisbane community to be safe, confident, and ready in the face of flooding and storm events, Madam Chairman, a community that is strong and resilient, no matter the climate conditions that we may face.

In 2017-18, we’ll continue to deliver on landmark projects, like Coorparoo Creek Park Stage 1, the Northern Suburbs Environment Centre, and the Witton Barracks Park. We’ll continue our commitment in laying the foundations for the Oxley Creek Transformation Project, to transform and develop 1,830 hectares, 15 kilometres long, former industrial land use areas along the corridor of Oxley Creek, that were for too long treated as a convenient drain or a quarry, and transform this area into a world class conservation corridor and landmark leisure space. We've established Oxley Creek Transformation Pty Ltd, which in its first 12 months of its 240-month journey, has been focusing on government arrangements, structure, objectives, and a timeline for developing a master plan. With over 65% of the landholding along the creek in either private hands or owned by the State Government, a critical first step was to establish an authority, similar to the South Bank Corporation, that can deal with the myriad of land ownership issues that have to be navigated in order to achieve our desired outcomes. In 2017-18, the project will focus on progressing the draft master plan for the corridor, including consultation and engagement activities, progressing concept planning and delivery of early on ground works within the corridor, company set up activities including development of a strategic and annual plan, and seeking collaboration and partnership opportunities. Madam Chairman, Outcome 2, Low Carbon and Clean Environment. This Administration committed to an ambitious task of Council becoming carbon neutral, and we've achieved this, becoming in the current financial year Australia's largest carbon neutral organisation. We’ll continue to maintain carbon neutral status for Council operations in the next financial year. This means continuing to purchase a proportion of our electricity from renewable energy sources, purchasing accredited carbon offsets to neutralise all direct and indirect carbon emissions from Council business operations, to roll out energy efficient projects at Council facilities, and to roll out new solar powered generation systems on Council buildings and facilities. Last year, the Clean Air Society of Australia and New Zealand awarded Council the Clean Air Achievement Award for 2016 for 20 years of commitment to the protection of Brisbane's air quality via the Clean Air Strategy. As I mentioned at the start, this is one more example of smart decisions, practical solutions taken over time. This Administration will continue the efforts to prevent the impacts on the community and the environment posed by air and noise pollution, contaminated land and chemical hazards. We will monitor, maintain and rehabilitate our former landfill sites and contaminated land to minimise impacts on our environment and the Brisbane community with a $5 million investment in restoration for recreation alone. We’ll continue to manage the environmental impacts of Council's own operations and demonstrate leadership in environmental risk management. Madam Chairman, Outcome 3, Biodiversity, Urban Forests and Parks. Council will continue to value, protect and restore the natural environment through the Bushland Acquisition Program, will protect land critical to the protection and enhancement of the city's biodiversity, and provide access to these acquisitions for residents to passively enjoy. In terms of planning, we’ll continue City Plan 2014 biodiversity provisions and development of guidelines that help conserve biodiversity. We’ll continue efforts to reduce the impacts of invasive species on the city's biodiversity through the continued implementation of the Brisbane Invasive Species Management Plan and the Wipe Out Weeds program. We’ll continue bushland restoration in 2017-18, through the delivery of the Environmental Offsets program and encourage the State Government to join us on their projects. Our city sees continued growth in the number of trees on our streets and in our parks. To reflect this, the budget allocation for tree

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 171 management has been increased to $16 million, which represents a five per cent increase. We will deliver Subtropical Boulevard enhancement projects along key transport routes, including Taringa, Indooroopilly and Wavell Heights. Council will continue to provide street tree plantings with local communities—two coming up this weekend—focusing on priority, shade hungry pathways and continue to strategically invest to provide cooler, greener, and more comfortable pathways for walking and cycling. In this budget, we’ll see $13.5 million investment kick-starting the construction of the Moggill Districts Sports Park. This park will provide district level sporting facilities to the wider Moggill, Bellbowrie and Anstead communities, to help increase participation in sport and recreation activities, an outcome recognised by the State Government with this contribution to the project. Construction is scheduled to commence mid-2017, and be completed mid-2018. A new all-abilities playground will be provided as part of a major upgrade of Walton Bridge Reserve, The Gap, and for the existing playground at Teralba Park, Everton Park, to be upgraded to an all-abilities standard. This year we'll complete park construction at West End Common, which will add to The Gabba’s 56 parkland areas that cover 95 hectares of land, including a number of the city's largest parks and green spaces. Madam Chairman, we will soon see the opening of the Mt Coot-tha Visitor Information Centre. The centre will be the premier facility linking all the amazing attractions that Mt Coot-tha has to offer. We'll continue the refurbishment of the Mt Coot-tha Botanic Gardens, 2017-18 funding will contribute to trail projects on the mountain, including the completion of the discovery trail, from Slaughter Falls picnic area to Simpson Falls picnic area. Madam Chairman, Sustainable Water Management, Outcome 4. Council will continue working with regional partners such as Queensland Urban Utilities and SEQwater to meet integrated water cycle outcomes. We'll continue to maintain stormwater harvesting and reuse systems to ensure continuing benefit to the communities, such as the delivery of water smart street trees, which harvest stormwater from the roadside to improve tree health and survival. This budget has support for the development and implementation of a catchment plan for the Lockyer Creek, mid-Brisbane River, and lower Brisbane as part of the Council of Mayors Resilient Rivers Initiative. Under this outcome, we'll deliver six natural waterway rehabilitation projects, continued oversight of our 2,100 Water Smart assets and 4,000 kilometres of waterways, and continue annual monitoring of the health of waterways at 42 sites across the city. Madam Chairman, we will continue to implement Council's flood risk management strategy, specifically for the Queensland Government-led Brisbane River Catchment Flood Study Strategic Floodplain Management Plan. Madam Chairman, under this outcome, we'll update Council's flood tools with the latest flood study data, which is a far cry from the practice those opposite followed during their time in administration. This includes making sure FloodWise property reports, flood awareness maps and city plans and mapping overlays are freely available. We'll continue to manage flooding to enable solutions to be developed for on-ground implementation. This budget sees an increase of over $3 million to implement pipe drainage solutions and continue to maintain our city's 3,000 kilometres of stormwater pipes. Madam Chairman, the Voluntary Home Purchase scheme has been enhanced and expanded and is now called the Residential Flood Assistance Program. Now this doesn't mean that the Voluntary Home Purchase scheme or the Flood Buyback scheme, as it was commonly known, has been scrapped. The budget allocation hasn't changed and purchases will still occur where appropriate. But the aim of the project is to optimise Council's support to the community to help relieve localised flooding, to provide greater floor resilience for residents who may experience flooding, but have no desire to move out.

Since 2005, Council has approached a total of 337 property owners—and Councillor GRIFFITHS thought this was Tweet-worthy the other day—and has purchased 107 properties, spending over $55 million via the Voluntary Home Purchase scheme, so not everyone who met the threshold under that scheme has wanted to sell. Buyback may be one option to assist residents, but this project will now provide a suite of options that will potentially increase the benefit for many more householders. Madam Chairman, this budget is about building on the existing commitments this Administration has made. I wish to thank briefly the officers who have been involved in preparing all this information, Tim Wright, Dave Henry and Kate Weise in particular, and in support of this budget, and I recommend or commend Outcome 1 to 4 in Program 3 to the Chamber. Chairman: Thank you, Councillor McLACHLAN. Councillor MATIC, would you like to speak as Secondary Chair at this time or would you prefer to wait? Further debate? Councillor GRIFFITHS. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yeah, thanks Madam Chair. I was happy if—do you want to? Councillor MATIC: Sorry, I appreciate that, sorry Councillor, I wasn't—my mistake, I'm sorry about that. Madam Chairman, I rise to speak to the elements of Program 3, in particular 3.5, Managing and Reducing Brisbane's Waste and Litter, and it's a great pleasure to be able to do so as the Chairman responsible for delivering this essential service to Brisbane residents. I want to take the opportunity at the out start to acknowledge and thank all of the officers, from Arron Lee, all the way down to all the staff for the exemplary job they do in delivering this service, but also in all the work they've undertaken in preparation of this budget. Madam Chairman, waste management is an essential part of the service of any great city, and the service that the Brisbane City Council provides is world-class to its residents. There are so many different elements to this, what seems as a very simple task, Madam Chairman, that are greatly supported through this budget, and the support that we have financially through the LORD MAYOR. Madam Chairman, as a city, waste management resource recovery is a series of efficient and effective services performed quickly and quietly wherever possible. For the most part, Brisbane's waste and litter management activities are highly organised and incredibly competent in the way they're delivered. In fact, as the Chairman, I'm proud to be able to responsible for this service area, that Brisbane's waste and resource recovery activities set a shining example in Australia for their efficiency and high standards of delivery. Properly managing waste and litter in a city the size of ours is hugely important, but it's also challenging and it requires ongoing innovation and investment in continuous improvement to adjust to our growing city, to ensure that we uphold community standards, and wherever feasible, deliver new cleaner, greener technologies. Managing and reducing Brisbane's waste and litter is absolutely a key element of achieving our citywide objective as a clean, green and sustainable city. Managing the city's waste streams and the infrastructure required for it, keeping our streets, parks and gardens, drains and creeks as free of litter as possible, is fundamental to Brisbane's ongoing success and growth. We have planned for an investment in the 2017-18 Budget of just over $583 million, in delivering a city that so many people want to come and enjoy, a clean, green and sustainable Brisbane. It's testament to the importance of waste management that major investment from this budget includes $131.2 million in operating funds for waste management and recycling, including City Cleansing.

Now this is a big investment and there is even more funding than this with additional project funding going on, but it's absolutely worth it for the services that we are providing and will continue to provide and improve in the upcoming years. Residents keep telling us in their feedback that they like the convenience of the household rubbish collection services that we provide. Through the different services, the red, the green and the yellow top bin, we are seeing even greater improvements in the amount of recycling, the increase in green waste collection, and importantly, Madam Chairman, the reduction of general waste into landfill. We've now got almost 27,000 of our larger 340 litre recycling bins in circulation in Brisbane, which is a great outcome for helping people to increase their recycling. We'll be working to make sure more of these recycling bins are adopted when they are needed, and that our recycling services continue to grow and become more efficient. We are working to see recycling and recovery rates continue to improve in our 2017-18 Budget, and we can do this with confidence and the right resources because of the investment that this Administration is making through the budget. Program 3.5 investment of $662,000 this year will be spent on increasing recycling, and that is through our Enhanced Public Place Recycling Program and our recycling services for business. This year's budget also continues to support our operation of our tip shops, which have become phenomenally successful with an investment of just over $1 million. I welcome the increased budget here under Program 3.5 to keep growing our green bin household green waste collection service, which is now being used by more than 84,000 Brisbane households. This is to dispose of their lawn and tree clippings from their yard. This service has grown at an average rate of around 32 bins per day since its inception, and it keeps 22,000 tonnes of green waste out of landfill. This Administration is making sure we've got the resources to continue to expand over coming years. The 2017-18 Budget, Madam Chairman, continues the popular annual kerbside large item collection service. We're seeing just around 42% of Brisbane residents involved in this. This year we will see around 300,000 kerbside pickups, rostered, promoted and undertaken with an investment of $6.3 million. Council encourages residents where possible to recycle or reuse their no longer needed household items by linking up with charities, such as Textile Beat, Salvation Army, Lifeline and other worthwhile organisation. By continuing our strong partnership with the Endeavour Foundation through our Resource Recovery Centres, a lot of these recycled clothing items are making their ways to the tip shops. By continuing this service through our kerbside collection, we are seeing all of those items go there as well. We're happy to do so again under this budget, Madam Chairman, because of the huge benefit of pride to local residents and the huge impact it has on reducing landfill. We now have an arrangement as part of that kerbside collection that enables the collection and recycling of even more e-waste, and we expect this to grow with newly expanded Federal targets for this type of recycling. Madam Chairman, we continue to operate a very efficient and well managed landfill at Rochedale, and the budget also allows funding for this activity to continue, as Councillors attended the Information Session that we had, we're continuing our work with ourselves to provide even greater capacity, to provide even greater efficiency, Madam Chairman, and we will see in August this year the implementation of that new cell to further meet the needs of a growing city. While we do our best to cut down on materials going to landfill and having had considerable success in doing so, with a 15% per capita reduction in waste to landfill, we still need to budget for landfill operations to provide us with a place to dispose of the lessening amounts of household waste that can't be recycled or reused. This budget allows us to continue other vital Council services in niche waste management areas including hazardous waste collection, dead animal collection, parks and footpath bin collections, the end processing of recycling

and green waste, and the requirement for essential items like wheelie bins to be supplied and serviced. Madam Chairman, while there is still some time to go in our current waste management contracts for collection, management of Resources Recovery Centres, and for things like bulk green waste and recycling management, we recognise that these services are absolutely vital, so we're getting ourselves ready. As Councillors would know, we're entering into new contracts, for the collection of waste and the resource recovery work through our alliance, through our new contracts in green waste, Madam Chairman, and through our continued contractual arrangements with Visy. Through these, through these contracts, we will see over time the great benefits to Brisbane residents through all of the enhancements and add-ons that these new contracts provide. It is important, Madam Chairman, to be properly prepared and ready, because Brisbane has the biggest contract for waste management in Australia. We pick up bins 32 million times a year, and manage the waste at our four Resource Recovery Centres and our landfill, and this delivery is absolutely at the core of service offered by our waste resource recovery branch and by Brisbane City Council. These do account for the majority of the expenses under 3.5.1, which is for Effective Waste Stream Management and Reduction. These are core activities. Some of our other elements that are included in this program include the enhancement of public place recycling and rolling out even more dual bins in public places, Madam Chairman, to provide greater service and greater opportunities for residents for recycling. Now a new initiative and a very exciting one, Madam Chairman, that we're implementing within this year, within our Waste Recovery branch, is the Love Food Hate Waste program. This is a successful international program, initiated from the UK, but seen rolled out through Europe and in Australia, Madam Chairman, recently in New South Wales and Victoria and across the sea in New Zealand. This is a behavioural change program that works in partnership with residents to look at education and awareness, Madam Chairman, to address the issue of food waste. We still see more than 35% of Brisbane's waste disposed in landfill every year as food waste, and we want to make sure that through this program, we will ensure that we reduce our greenhouse gases and find more efficient uses for that food waste, Madam Chairman. The process of being able to rethink our food waste and making sure that we shop in a better and more managed way is fundamental to how we can reduce that waste stream, but also looking, Madam Chairman, at those opportunities of improving our composting and our worm farming through our initiatives, through our community gardens at the moment and our other programs. Overall, what we seen within this program is our strong commitment to continue this world-class service, to provide those efficiencies and add-ons for Brisbane residents, and to work towards our goal of a clean, green and sustainable Brisbane, but importantly also, Madam Chairman, to implement the zero waste strategy, which is the cornerstone of this Council and this Administration. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor GRIFFITHS. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Thank you, Madam Chair. Now we've heard the story from the Administration about what's going on in this program with Clean, Green, Sustainable City, let's look at some of the reality. Madam Chair, the interesting thing with this program is the number of carryovers. Let's just start listing those. The Koala Research Centre had a carryover of $752 million—$752,000, sorry. The city parks upgrade had a carryover of $4 million. Cathedral Square had a carryover of $870,000. The Northern Suburbs Environment Centre had a carryover $100,000. Neighbourhood parks had a carryover. Windsor Dog Park had a carryover. One hundred and fifty-nine thousand was the carryover for the Jubilee Park at Bardon.

The water features had a carryover of $178,000. We also had carryovers for Oxley Creek Vision of $780,000. Two hundred and twenty thousand for the Jindalee Boat Ramp, $80,000 for South Bank public moorings. Stormwater drains had a carryover of $494,000. We also had a $270,000 carryover for Abbotsford Street, Bowen Hills. Restoration of recreation facility where we needed a road, $1.6 million, and West End Riverside Land Remediation project had a carryover of almost $8 million. Madam Chair, there have been massive carryovers from this program. This is a core program for Council and for their residents. It's a core program that residents love, and they love seeing action around environment and we need that action around environment. Having carryovers is not action. It's saying we didn't get the job done. Madam Chair, this is really an area where there are lots of claims made that really we're lacking in delivery, and unfortunately, on top of the carryovers coming over, we also saw that there were cuts in this program. So there were actually cuts to our engagement strategy with the residents of Brisbane. So our Green Heart CitySmart operations were cut. Our Green Heart Homes and Schools, that program was also cut. We also saw our Green Heart sustainability events cut as well. On top of that, Madam Chair, we saw cuts to our Citywide Litter Prevention program of $366,000. Now apparently this is about reorganisation, so we're doing Citywide Litter Prevention, we're going to achieve the same results, but with less money, where we're taking out $366,000 out of a program. That will be interesting to see. Now on top of that, Madam Chair, we saw cuts to playground safety upgrades. That was cut by $137,000. How can you cut playground safety? That is appalling. Madam Chair, we also saw cuts to trimming of trees in our parks by $148,000, and cuts of $300,000 to cleaning of our flood-affected waterways. Madam Chair, these are significant cuts for residents of Brisbane. These are significant cuts across Brisbane and will impact on residents. We also note that there was no significant funding in bikeway lighting. Well we made a commitment to do far more than the LNP with bikeway lighting, because we think all our bikeways should be safe, not just some of our bikeways, we believe that that program needs to be expanded greatly in Council and the LNP aren't delivering on that. Now undoubtedly, as they have in the other two programs, LNP Councillors will get up and trumpet about all the pork-barrelling and their awards. They'll talk about all the great resources they're getting. Undoubtedly Councillor KING will have a lot to say, and I look forward to listening to her list of grand projects that she's received from this LORD MAYOR. But unfortunately that isn't the same for all parts of our city. It will be interesting to listen to the comparison between the two sides of the Chamber. Similarly, Madam Chair, the Oxley Creek project. It has lots of good ideas. It's great that we're going ahead and improving and restoring this neglected and abused waterway. If we want to see improvements in the bay, we need to concentrate on this waterway. But unfortunately, Madam Chair, we saw that with this program there was a carryover of $780,000. A carryover for one of the key election promises of the LORD MAYOR. Now I was interested hear that $5.4 million will be spent on that project this year and it will be for consultation. Well can I say, Councillor McLACHLAN, we're all interested in being involved in that consultation—the community, certainly the local Councillors, residents and in particular community groups. So we're looking forward to actually seeing some detail around this plan this year. Now, the other thing that was of interest and one of the things I do respect Councillor Newman for, was his dealing with the issue of flooding in our city, particularly the issue of buying back of flood-affected homes. Now that was supported by both sides of this Chamber, and it was disappointing that that funding has gone from $5 million, to $3 million, for voluntary home buybacks and now we're seeing another change where we're saying that it will be around flood assistance. The reality here, Madam Chair, will be seeing how that flood

assistance is delivered to residents and what it actually means as a direct result. Certainly I'll be watching that this year in its rollout, and seeing how practically it affects, particularly flood affected residents across our city. Madam Chair, this is a part of the budget that residents love. It's a part of the budget that we involve residents in, in our city. It's about the future of the city. Unfortunately, to date, it's been about too many carryovers and not enough delivery. Hopefully the Administration will lift its game in the coming year, and actually produce some good results and less carryovers with this budget. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor WYNDHAM. Councillor WYNDHAM: Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I rise to speak on Program 3 – Clean, Green and Sustainable City. Madam Chair, that's what we are and nothing makes it more evident to me than history, and I talked earlier in another program about getting it right and working for the future, and I'll speak a little bit more on that later. But let's have a look at history for starters, and some would say, how could I probably remember this? But when I was going to college, see we already get scoffing from the other side, without hearing what I have to say. Councillor interjecting. Councillor WYNDHAM: Where did I go to college? They actually did have a college in Brisbane in those days, yes. When I went to college, it was observed then that Brisbane had a problem with pollution, 1976. The problem was that during the day, because of our prevailing winds, a lot of the pollution, et cetera, that was caused by manufacturing, vehicles, et cetera, et cetera, was pushed towards the ranges. But of course in the evenings, with the cooling air, that pollution would then fall because the cool air drops, so it would remain above the city and you could quite often, of a morning, wake up and look across city and it wasn't fog, it was smog. I remember we were doing some research, a group and I, on, I guess you could say things that are common to us these days, solar power and solar hot water. The interesting thing is that, I guess some of that work that we were doing then as just a small university college group, is probably a little more in place these days. We did have a bit of a problem convincing people that solar hot water was safe when we were able to create boiling water. They said, ‘oh that's a bit unsafe, people will turn their taps on and burn themselves’. Councillor interjecting. Councillor WYNDHAM: Do I hear noise? Or is it just static. Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, that wasn't appropriate. Councillor WYNDHAM: No, it's not the mic. Madam Chair, come forward to today. We look across our city and we see many solar cells. We as a Council are now 100% carbon neutral. I would not have envisaged that —I would have envisaged now we would have had fairly horrific pollution problems. We've been awarded in 2016 and 2014, Most Sustainable City in Australia. I remember during the drought we were leading technology across the world in some cases, in water conservation. We deserve the accolade for being the Most Sustainable City. It wasn't awarded by just a group out there that thought we've got to give this to someone. It was awarded by well recognised groups within Australia and New Zealand. Now let's get on to, I guess, what we're trying to do now across this city and we've been doing for some time, is we're trying to sell a story and I love stories. I guess it comes from being a teacher way back in both special education and high schools. We've got our tip shops and at the green fair the other day, I bought some crockery. Sixty dollars, I thought, now there's a bargain because

the exact same crockery set I bought in 1984 for $160, which is almost two weeks' wages. I googled it and you can still buy the same crockery set for $300, so I thought $60 was a bargain. Along with that as well, I bought a clock for five bucks, and I thought, oh well, if it doesn't work, I can throw it in the bin, but it's a good looking clock, it'll work for what I want it for. Miraculously I whacked a battery in it and it's perfect and I know that the movement cost a lot more than the $5 that I paid for it. Councillor interjecting. Councillor WYNDHAM: It's correct twice a day, in fact it's correct all the time. But, Madam Chair, by having our tip shops, we're getting rid of what some people would call their junk. I'm proud enough to go out there and buy someone else's junk and use it, and we should be educating others to go out there and buy these items. For all I know, that crockery set has possibly sitting in a box for the last 30 years unused, brand new. I'm happy to use it and if I break some of the ones I've got, I've got lots of spares now for 60 bucks. Madam Chair, we talked about kerbside pickup. What we need to do now is educate people that half of that kerbside pickup that you're putting out there, take a drive to the tip shop, donate it. Donate it before someone else raids it and makes money from it—if you donate it, charity benefits. If you put it on the street and let someone else come along and pick it up, yes someone benefits, but I'd love to see charity benefit more. The Northern Suburbs Environment Centre, I'm reasonably passionate about this, I guess that's my upbringing on farms. But we look at our Boondall Centre, we look at our environment centre at Chermside Hills and we look at the amount of school groups, et cetera, that have been through that, and the stories that have been told and the education that's been passed on, and generations will benefit from that. The other side says, ‘oh, we've got carryovers’. Well as I was saying a little earlier, your first expense should be your worst expense—spend wisely to start with, plan properly and get it right. That is better than rushing ahead, spending and re-spending. I seem to remember, I think it was Coronation Drive where they wanted to convert the sewerage pipe into a water pipe. In the 1990s, I won't tell you which administration that was, but it sort of didn't go over real well when people sort of thought, well hang on, you're going to clean out the sewerage pipe and start delivering our water through it. They did dig it up, that's probably why Coro Drive got dug up and put new piping in. Madam Chair, we look at Karawatha and what has been produced down there. We have a vision on the northside to have a similar place to educate our community and our children because our children are our future, our environment is our future and if we neglect to get it right, we're neglecting our future. Witton Barracks, great little project and I think it's even got a bike path through it. Yes, we're extending those links. Some people might say, well to do all that work in Witton Barracks to put in a bike path, it's an expensive bike path. But no it's not, it's part of a plan. It's another link. Mt Coot-tha trails expansion, we're getting people out into the environment, we're wanting people out in the environment. The zipline, yes, it's all about fun, but once people start having fun in the environment, they'll start to take care of the environment, they'll start to enjoy the environment. You've only got to look at what happens in Cairns. Chairman: Councillor WYNDHAM your time has expired. Councillor WYNDHAM: Time flies when you’re having fun. Chairman: There are, under the Meetings Local Law for budget sessions, no extensions. As the time is approaching 5pm, Councillor WINES can I have a motion for adjournment please?

ADJOURNMENT: 654/2016-17 At that time, 4.58pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Steven TOOMEY, that the meeting adjourn until 9am on Thursday 22 June 2017.

FOURTH DAY – Thursday 22 June 2017 PRESENT:

The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK) – LNP The Chairman of Council, Councillor Angela OWEN (Calamvale Ward) – LNP

LNP Councillors (and Wards) ALP Councillors (and Wards) Krista ADAMS (Holland Park) Peter CUMMING (Wynnum Manly) (The Leader of Adam ALLAN (Northgate) the Opposition) Matthew BOURKE (Jamboree) Jared CASSIDY (Deagon) (Deputy Leader of the Amanda COOPER (Bracken Ridge) Opposition) Vicki HOWARD (Central) (Deputy Chairman of Steve GRIFFITHS (Moorooka) Council) Charles STRUNK (Forest Lake) Steven HUANG (Macgregor) Shayne SUTTON (Morningside) Fiona KING (Marchant) Kim MARX (Runcorn) Queensland Greens Councillor (and Ward) Peter MATIC (Paddington) Jonathan SRI (The Gabba) Ian McKENZIE (Coorparoo) David McLACHLAN (Hamilton) Independent Councillor (and Ward) Ryan MURPHY (Doboy) Nicole JOHNSTON (Tennyson) Kate RICHARDS (Pullenvale) Adrian SCHRINNER (Chandler) (Deputy Mayor) Julian SIMMONDS (Walter Taylor) Steven TOOMEY (The Gap) Andrew WINES (Enoggera) Norm WYNDHAM (McDowall)

The Deputy Chairman of Council, Councillor Vicki HOWARD, declared the adjourned meeting open and called for apologies.

APOLOGIES: 655/2016-17 An apology was submitted on behalf of Councillor Angela OWEN, and Councillor OWEN was granted leave of absence from the meeting on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Steven TOOMEY.

RESUMPTION OF DEBATE ON THE 2017-18 BUDGET:

Deputy Chairman: Further debate— Councillor interjecting. Deputy Chairman: Actually— Councillor CUMMING: Councillor GRIFFITHS is expected to be here, and he’s gone to some medical appointments this morning. He’s torn a ligament in his knee, I think. So he’ll be in by about 11am. Deputy Chairman: And Councillor OWEN has just arrived. We just did an apology in case. Okay, so we might need to—what do we need to do for that? Councillors interjecting.

At that time, 9.03am, the Chairman, Councillor Angela OWEN, resumed the Chair.

Chairman: Order! When the Chamber is silent, we will continue. We will now resume the Program number 3, Clean, Green and Sustainable City. Further speakers? Councillor STRUNK. Councillor STRUNK: Madam Chair, before I start to talk on this particular very important Program 3, I just wanted to express my joy in being a Queenslander today after the great work that our team did for us last night. Councillors interjecting. Councillor STRUNK: Yes, hear, hear. Okay, Madam Chair, I rise to speak on Program 3 – Clean, Green and Sustainable City. We all want our city to be clean, green and sustainable, but this budget in some areas doesn’t invest in the future, but relies upon past funding levels to carry it forward. Whether it’s an investment in our established parks, keeping our city clean, reducing pollution, or conservation management and response, we don’t see a lot of growth in financial support in this program. Sustainable resilient community—if we look at the much publicised Green Heart projects, we see a drop in funding this year over last year, with a small increase in the forward estimates which will only account for inflation. When I asked during estimates I was told that this is seed money. Well, Madam Chair, with the expected growth in population and the impacts in our environment, we should do the right thing and make more money available for seed funding to keep up and maintain our clean, green, sustainable city environment. Education is at the heart of these projects, and we should be doing a lot more with our schools, community groups, businesses and individuals. More money for grants programs should be a first good step to assist those community groups and businesses in identifying and helping resource projects events to educate the whole of the community. Now, let’s move on to 3.1.1.2, Community Conservation Partnerships. There is a reduction in real terms for Community Conservation Assistance, Community Conservation Partnerships, the Lord Mayor’s Community Sustainability and Environment Grants, and the Native Animal Ambulance funding. Madam Chair, looking at this poor investment into our future, if I was a member of a creek catchment or other environmental group, I would be seriously questioning the commitment of this Council in this area going forward. If I was a member of the RSPCA that undertake and operate the native animal ambulance, I would feel let down badly by the lack of funding growth, especially with the ever-increasing loss of native wildlife habitat due to residential and industrial development across this city. Now, moving on to Conservation Reserves Management, over the last financial year, we’ve had an increase in the hectares of land under management, from 9,000 to 9,500, an increase of five per cent. But we’ve had a cut in funding by 22% in the 2017-18 and through the forward estimates. This program also projects an increase in expense of 90%, with little movement in projected revenue. There might be a very good reason or a very good explanation, Madam Chair, and I look forward to hearing the reply. 3.3.3.1, Managing Trees on Public Land, Madam Chair. I think this project is one of the most disturbing in regards the cut of funding of 16% this year and through the forward estimates. I know I’m not the only Councillor that has a substantial number of park trees in their ward, and considering that we have had an increase of 50 parks across the city since last year, I can’t understand how we would be reducing funding in this area.

Continuing to audit our park trees and making sure that they are healthy, removing or trimming unsafe ones, is vital if we are going to look after the safety of our residents who take their children to play, walk the dog, picnic and other recreational activities. One of the more regular calls I get to my office is from residents about a perceived dangerous tree. We can’t have a situation because of budgetary constraints that we put off trimming, or in some cases removing trees, because someone thought it was a good idea to cut $150,000 out of this budget. Now, instead of cutting, we should be increasing funding if we want to look after and grow our living environment responsibly. Madam Chair, I don’t want to come across all negative about our parks, I acknowledge there has been substantial increase in funding for key park upgrades and park infrastructure programs, but the ongoing maintenance of our trees in our parks can never be restrained. Moving on to 3.3.4.2, Park Maintenance and Renewal. Can I say I was pleased to see the increase in funding for lake systems in our parks. The lake in my ward takes a lot of looking after, and the better job we do, the more residents right across Brisbane that will come and enjoy the lake precinct environment. Outcome 3.5, Managing and Reducing Brisbane Waste and Litter program. Madam Chair, residents in my ward are taking part in increasing numbers specifically with litter reduction. We have now established two groups, one in Forest Lake and one in Inala, that are volunteering each month to pick up litter on a Sunday. As we well know, there is nothing that has a greater impact on how people view a suburb than having too much litter or graffiti, for that matter. I myself have been a part of an Adopt a Road, Clean Up Australia program for a number of years, and it’s very satisfying to walk or drive past an area that the litter has been removed. Council litter prevention officers Cristal and Paul have been a great help in educating and resourcing practical collection equipment, and also two pop-up litter shops events to aid my community’s volunteers. Madam Chair, I was sad to see that the funding for this important area for waste management cut in funding of five per cent in the citywide litter prevention area. Madam Chair, we got an increase in street sweeping, but a reduction in litter. Can I suggest this is illogical? Where do we think that the non-vegetation street litter comes from? It seems to me if we prevent the litter in the first place, that we won’t have to clean our streets as often. What’s the old adage, ‘an ounce of prevention is equal to a pound of cure’. Madam Chair, in conclusion, as I said, we want our city to be clean and green, but it will take an investment, and sadly there doesn’t seem to be enough investment in this area in this budget. Thank you. Chairman: Further speakers? Councillor McKENZIE. Councillor McKENZIE: Thanks, Madam Chairman. Yes, of course I rise today to speak on the Clean, Green and Sustainable City, Program 3, and just to answer Councillor STRUNK on a number of the issues that he raised. I think we’ll all agree that some of the most contentious areas in the city are trees and dogs. Of course, we’ll always get differing opinions on trees, whether they should be there, when they should be there, how they should be cut, et cetera. I believe that the Council is doing a wonderful job in maintaining these trees. It’s a credit to the officers that they’re able to balance the requirements of residents plus the retention of the greening of the city. I will come to that point later on in my address. But first of all I’d like to say it’s recognised that Brisbane is a leader in environmental management of Australia’s Most Sustainable City, which is us. It has a world reputation, which is a hallmark of being a New World City. Keep Australia Beautiful agrees with this, and it has been named Australia’s Most Sustainable City in 2014 and 2016. This

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 182 budget is a public commitment by this Administration to keep up the hard environment work and to improve its efforts through innovation and technology to enhance the health and wellbeing of our residents. Council continues to engage residents through the popular Green Heart program, by providing sustainable events and providing residents and schools with information, tools and support programs. One of the key activities of Brisbane is its clean air. This is something that’s invisible, but we notice it when it’s not there. This dates back to 1996 when Brisbane was the first Australian city to formally have a Clean Air Strategy. This Council is continually promoting clean air through supporting technologies in its public transport, walking and cycling programs, and bushfire management. Through its refuse program, Council operates 150 closed landfill sites, including the management of environmental pollutants, contaminated air and chemical hazards, to ensure a clean environment and a quality of life. With respect to carbon emissions in this Council, this Council will expend $4.2 million to ensure our city is 100% carbon neutral. With regard to biodiversity, urban forests and parks, in my ward of Coorparoo, Council is continuing to deliver, with the Norman Creek 2012-2031 Master Plan to the extent of $3.6 million. This is one of the largest, if not the largest, waterways in the City of Brisbane. This is additional to Stage 1 of the Coorparoo Creek Park where $800,000 has been allocated in this budget, because this is an area providing open recreational space for the increasing population of the area of Coorparoo. It was designed a number of years ago in association with the Eastern corridor neighbourhood plan providing open space for people living in units. The Coorparoo Park also has an enhanced waterway function and flood mitigation. The high areas of Coorparoo are fairly old, and this is where flood mitigation starts. It starts down the bottom near where the water is discharged. My residents are very pleased that there’s something being done in this regard. Now, the statistics relating to Brisbane’s green space are enormous. Brisbane has more than 2,050 parks, covering 6,000 hectares. We maintain over 575 street trees, comprising more than 20 species, and control a park network of varying sizes to meet the needs of all residents. The urban forest concept remains an important element of this city’s identity, and is key to reducing the urban heat island effect, by creating shade over bikeways and footpaths. The Bushland Acquisition Program will expend $29 million in this budget and contribute to bushland preservation and biodiversity to ensure quality of life for generations to come. At a ward level, I am pleased that Whites Hill Reserve will receive an upgrade of $101,000, Leicester Street Park in Coorparoo will receive $50,000, Burn Street Park, Camp Hill will receive $65,000, and Willard Street Park in Carina Heights, $124,000. As a subtropical and resilient water smart city, Brisbane has a special responsibility to manage its water. In many ways Brisbane is defined by the river and the Moreton Bay. These are fed by many waterways across our city. One of the most important areas for rejuvenation, which I mentioned before, is the Norman Creek catchment area which flows through the ward of Coorparoo. This plan is currently under development, and I am pleased to say, with a lot of consultation with committed community members. As the biggest Council in Australia, Council has the biggest rubbish collection, and the disposal of picking up 32 million bins every year. Council has a range of efficient services for residents, businesses and industry, as part of a comprehensive waste management system for the city. This involves kerbside collection of domestic waste, green waste and recyclables, and the operation of engineered landfills, tip shops, and a Resource Recovery Centre. Keeping our city clean is a vital service, not only for health reasons, but to retain our city’s beautiful image. On a side point, I’d just like to point out that on Tuesday this week one of our Council refuse collections officers noticed an elderly lady in my ward, a 100-year-old lady, lying in her house. He

immediately contacted the ambulance services and she’s now in a comfortable position. This lady had her 100th birthday about a week ago, and I sent her a card for it. So this is something that we don’t always see. The officers in our Council do many things that are very commendable. So, in conclusion, I wish to commend Councillor MATIC and Councillor McLACHLAN in their committed management of this area, and all the Council officers who do a wonderful job in keeping our city beautiful and clean. Thank you very much. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor JOHNSTON. Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, Madam Chairman, I rise to speak on Program 3, Clean, Green and Sustainable City, and I flag I have an amendment to move in a little bit. Madam Chairman, hasn’t this program generated a little bit of debate in the last week? I have to say it’s been refreshing to have a bit of time to go out and talk to the media about what’s in the budget, and that seems to have upset the LORD MAYOR and Councillor ADAMS quite significantly, Madam Chairman. There are a couple of items in here that I just want to comment on particularly, and that is drainage. Now, Madam Chairman, this year we’re spending about $22 million on new drainage, about 60% on the northside. Now, that, Madam Chairman, is slightly better than previous years where it’s either been zero on the southside or about 20% on the southside. So, you know, the fact that they’re spending around 40% of the drainage budget on the southside seems like a good thing, except for the massive underspend for the past, well, I don’t know, as long as I’ve been here, 10 years. Madam Chairman, the problem we’ve got is that the LORD MAYOR is operating under some sort of illusion that my residents, I’m telling my residents what to do. I can tell you, Madam Chairman, that our system of representative democracy is that they tell me what to do. When my residents stand up week in and week out and say to me, ‘Nicole, we need better drainage in this city, we need the backflow valves promised after the flood report’, I come into this place on their behalf and I speak, and I say, this is what they want. But no, the LORD MAYOR of this city abuses residents on radio who are simply standing up for— Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, stop. Councillor JOHNSTON, that is not an appropriate comment to make in this place. I ask you to withdraw it. Councillor JOHNSTON: Okay, I’ll withdraw abuse—is extremely rude to a resident on radio about his concerns about the lack of investment in drainage in my ward and elsewhere in the city, and he’s made a formal complaint. Chairman: Right, Councillor JOHNSTON, stop right there. This is the budget debate about the budget program, it is not an opportunity for you to engage in a diatribe about everything else relating to Council business. You will speak to the budget or you will sit down. Councillor JOHNSTON: And thank you, Madam Chairman, I am, and his concern and mine, which I come in here to speak about, is the fact that this Administration is not investing a cent in the necessary drainage needed in my ward and the necessary backflow valves needed in my ward. Now, what we know is that this Administration is raking in hundreds of millions of dollars in extra funds from developers, and they are not investing it into the necessary stormwater infrastructure that is needed. Now, in my ward, what is needed is clearly on the record. Council did a report in 2000. There are— Chairman: No, Councillor JOHNSTON, whatever the reports were in 2000, that is not contained in the budget programs.

Bring yourself to relevance to the budget program specifically as it is before us, or I will sit you down. That’s your second warning. Councillor JOHNSTON: And, Madam Chairman, they are not funded in the budget again this year. Not only that, this LORD MAYOR is seeking to remove a number of projects from our long-term planning, so in the forwards there is going to be less money for drainage. Now, let me be clear, that is not good enough. My residents want to see all the backflow valves funded, recommended out of the 2011 flood, and they want to see drainage upgraded as promised in this Council’s planning, which is not being funded. Now, I make that clear. I am in here representing them, and I will stand up and speak for them, not the other way around, LORD MAYOR, and you need to reflect on that, I think. It also seemed to upset Councillor ADAMS somewhat as well, who mentioned a new program that is listed in the budget called the Residential Flood Assistance Program. I heard her mention it on radio, when I was listening and, Madam Chairman, I thought, oh well, maybe there is something useful in the budget for once. I’ll make a file request and I’ll see what I can find out about it. So, I made a file request about a program that Councillor ADAMS has publicly discussed on radio saying a program that is out there to help residents, so I thought, okay, well, we’ll find out what the eligibility criteria are. We may be able to assist them. We may be able to refer residents to it. Made a file request a week ago, and this is the reply, ‘The request for access to documents relating to the new Residential Flood Assistance Program referred to in the budget, under section 172 of the Act, information you have requested is unable to be released as it contains information that is Cabinet-in-Confidence. I regret I am unable to assist you’. A secret flood assistance program—that’s what we have, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, Councillor JOHNSTON, I have given you a little bit of leeway, but you need to come back to the specifics of the budget, please. Councillor JOHNSTON: I am, Madam Chairman. This is a new program— Chairman: Don’t answer me back, Councillor JOHNSTON. Councillor JOHNSTON: Madam Chairman, this is a new program in the budget. Are you unaware what is in the budget at 3.4? Chairman: Right, Councillor JOHNSTON, do not give me attitude in this place. I have given you direction to come back to the budget. You need to start behaving accordingly. Councillor JOHNSTON: 3.4—Residential Flood Assistance Program. It’s a new program in the budget. It’s a secret. Now, I have requested the documents to find out about the eligibility criteria and, Madam Chairman, it is— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor JOHNSTON: —not being provided. So why on earth, Madam Chairman, does this Administration want to keep a new budget program secret? That’s what I want to know. That’s what my residents want to know. I think that’s poor form, myself. You would think, Madam Chairman, that if this was a good program that this Administration was proud of, they would be happy to tell a Councillor what is in the budget and ensure that residents could find out about it. But are they doing that? No. They are using the secrecy provisions in the City of Brisbane Act to prevent that information from getting out into our community, and I don’t think that’s good enough, Madam Chairman. I’ll note my concern with the Oxley Transformation project, which is allegedly going to spend $20 million over four years. Given they’ve massively underspent in the current year by over $1 million, I think we can have very little faith in that. My residents are concerned that there has been no consultation about this program, and they are extremely concerned about the development proposed for the Oxley Creek Common, and remain so. Again, this Administration has sworn the community representatives on the board of the private company to secrecy.

They’ve made her sign a secrecy agreement so she cannot talk about what is happening with the Oxley Transformation project. That has concerned residents, and I can tell you are damaging this project enormously by keeping it secret. Witton Army Barracks, another $1 million. God help us, I hope there’s provision for a future road and bridge through there and not a giant playground in the way. Tree funding also being massively underspent. We are spending less to replace trees lost in the super cell storm. We are spending less on trees to replace trees lost after ex-Tropical Cyclone Debbie. So I am extremely concerned, Madam Chairman, that this budget does very little, very little. The one good thing that is in there, I can say, is $43,000 to fix the toilets at Graceville—$43,000. So, that will get new toilet bowls and a new sink, I’m told, Madam Chairman. So, yes, that’s great. We’re very grateful for $43,000, thank you very much.

MOTION FOR AMENDMENT TO PROGRAM 3: CLEAN, GREEN SUSTAINABLE CITY 656/2016-17 It was moved by Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON, seconded by Councillor Charles STRUNK, that:

In item 3.1.3.1 Environmental and Liveability Initiatives Council transfers

1. $100,000 to undertake safety lighting in Lagonda St Park, Annerley through to Vallely St Annerley as a new project item in 3.3.4.2 Enhanced Safety Lighting; and 2. $2.255 million to 3.4.3.4 major drainage capital allocation for the construction of additional backflow valves and major drainage improvements in flood prone areas of the southside.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, to the amendment. Councillor JOHNSTON: Thank you, Madam Chairman. As I— Councillor ADAMS: Point of order, Madam Chair. Councillor JOHNSTON: As I’ve outlined in my speech— Chairman: Order! Councillor JOHNSTON: As I’ve outlined in my speech— Chairman: Stop, Councillor JOHNSTON, there’s a point of order. Councillor ADAMS. Councillor ADAMS: Madam Chair, just a question on the amendment that’s been made here. I understand the amendment to put the money in, but whereabouts is the money coming from? I believe that amendments have to have where the money is coming from in the budget to be a valid amendment for a budget program. Councillor SUTTON: Point of order, Madam Chair. Can I just ask a question about that, too? What happens if the money is coming from a different program? Isn’t it the right course of action to amend— Chairman: Can I just stop everybody for a moment, please? Councillor SUTTON: —the program? Chairman: Because I have just received the amendment, I am reading it. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Just a moment, Councillor JOHNSTON. Councillor JOHNSTON, I uphold Councillor ADAMS’ point of order because your amendment is saying that it transfers funds into certain projects, but it does not stipulate where those funds are coming from.

You can’t transfer something to something unless you stipulate where it is coming from. Therefore, I rule that your amendment is incompetent. Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON. Councillor JOHNSTON: I draw your attention to the first line of the motion which says, ‘In item 3.1.3.1, Environmental and Liveability Initiatives, Council transfers’. That is the program number from which the money is being taken, and it is being, as the motion says, transferred to the following schedule, 3.4.3.4. Chairman: And, Councillor JOHNSTON— Councillor JOHNSTON: It says it very clearly in line 1, and I refer you to— Chairman: No, Councillor JOHNSTON, do not argue with me. Councillor JOHNSTON: —page 44 of the budget. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, do not argue with me. Your motion is not written as a competent motion. Councillor JOHNSTON: It is, Madam Chairman, it is. Chairman: Sit down now. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, I am telling you now to resume your seat. Councillor JOHNSTON: It says it in line 1. Chairman: I have— Councillor JOHNSTON: Line 1. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, stop yelling across the— Councillor JOHNSTON: Line 1. Chairman: Councillor— Councillor JOHNSTON: Line 1. Line 1 of the amendment. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON— Councillor JOHNSTON: Line 1 of the amendment says where it’s coming from. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON— Councillor JOHNSTON: Line 1 of the amendment says where it’s coming from. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON. Councillor JOHNSTON! DEPUTY MAYOR: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Councillor JOHNSTON: Line 1 of the amendment says where it’s coming from. Chairman: Point of order, DEPUTY MAYOR.

ADJOURNMENT: 657/2016-17 At that time, 9.33am, it was resolved on the motion of the DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES, that the meeting adjourn for a period of 5 minutes.

UPON RESUMPTION:

Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON.

MOTION FOR AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT MOTION: 658/2016-17 It was moved by Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON, seconded by Councillor Jonathan SRI, that the amendment motion be amended by the insertion of such words so that the motion would read as follows:

In item 3.1.3.1 Environmental and Liveability Initiatives, Fountains and Water Features, Council transfers

1. $100,000 to undertake safety lighting in Lagonda St Park, Annerley through to Vallely St Annerley as a new project item in 3.3.4.2 Enhanced Safety Lighting; and 2. $2.255 million to 3.4.3.4 major drainage capital allocation for the construction of additional backflow valves and major drainage improvements in flood prone areas of the southside.

Chairman: Can I have a copy of the amendment, please, so I can read it? Councillor JOHNSTON, what you have just said and what has been handed to me is different, and whilst you may have just written on here ‘Fountains and Water Features’, I need to—can you repeat what you said, because it is not what is written on this piece of paper. Because you also haven’t referred to the specific program number in the budget. Councillor JOHNSTON: In item 3 point— Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, don’t speak like that— Councillor JOHNSTON: —1 point 3— Chairman: —in this place. Councillor JOHNSTON: —point 1— Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, stop. Stop right now, Councillor JOHNSTON. I’ve already told you earlier today not to behave with attitude. Now, your behaviour before we went for the adjournment was appalling. It was not appropriate for this Chamber, and also, your conduct was disorderly in the Antechamber. Now, if you are going to move an amendment, you need to refer specifically to the project not the entire program that you are referring to, not just specifically the item numbers as well. What you have given me is just a couple of words scribbled on your previous amendment, which I ruled out of order. Now, I am trying to clarify exactly what your amendment is, because when you stood up, you spoke at quite a fast pace and I want to ensure that I have the correct wording to make a ruling appropriately. So, if you could please stand and repeat your amendment in an appropriate fashion, that would be appreciated. Councillor JOHNSTON: In item 3.1.3.1—and I’ll repeat that—in item 3.1.3.1, Environmental and Liveability Initiatives, Fountains and Water Features, Council transfers (1) $100,000 to undertake safety lighting in Lagonda Street Park, Annerley, through to Vallely Street, Annerley, as a new project item in 3.3.4.2, Enhanced Safety Lighting; and (2), $2.255 million in 3.4.3.4, Major Drainage Capital Allocation for the construction of additional backflow valves and major drainage improvements in flood-prone areas of the southside. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, you could have said that without the attitude. I am trying to assist here, and you are being demonstrably disrespectful. Now, given that that motion identifies a specific project in item 3.1 within Program 3, Clean, Green and Sustainable City, and it has been seconded by Councillor SRI, I will allow it to proceed. Councillor JOHNSTON: Hallelujah. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, there’s no need for that. Your continued disorderly conduct and answering back and disrespect for this place is disorderly conduct. One more incident and it will be noted in the Minutes under section 186A.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Answering back would be telling you, you are absolutely the most useless Chairman in the history of the universe, so note that in the record. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, I have given you enough warnings. I have given you enough leeway. I have tried to assist you, and you have chosen to be continually disrespectful to this place. Your inappropriate behaviour earlier and your continued disrespect, I require that your behaviour be noted in the Minutes under section 186A of the City of Brisbane Act.

Order under section 186A of the City of Brisbane Act 2010 that disorderly conduct by Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON be noted in the minutes

Chairman: Given that the time is now 10:29am, Councillor WINES.

ADJOURNMENT: 659/2016-17 At that time, 10.30am, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Steven TOOMEY, that the meeting adjourn for a period of 15 minutes, to commence only when all Councillors had vacated the Chamber and the doors have been locked.

Council stood adjourned at 10.32am.

UPON RESUMPTION:

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON. Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, Madam Chairman. I, as I have done for many years now, raised concerns about spending on nice to haves, rather than the essentials that are needed to support basic services to residents in my ward and more broadly on the southside. One of the clearest points where this Administration is letting down residents is on the basic drainage and backflow valves that are needed to protect them from flooding and to mitigate flooding in their communities. Madam Chairman, I can't in good conscience endorse a budget that provides for things like fountains and water features, the Oxley Creek Transformation project, the Northern Suburbs Environmental Centre or even the Witton Barracks Park, a park for residents, Madam Chairman, a park. So I can't endorse that kind of spending when residents in my area are being disadvantaged by Council's lack of investment in fundamental safety and amenity projects that are necessary for the city. So as a result, I have moved this amendment today to transfer $100,000 to safety lighting in Lagonda Street Park, Annerley through to Vallely Street. We have yet again a significant under-investment in lighting in busy commuter parks around the city. So this pathway leads from Fairfield Rail Station up to Ipswich Road. The planning money was provided in 2009 and 2010 by this Council, but the project has not been delivered over the past seven years. Now that's not good enough, that is not good enough. This Council funds a tiny, tiny amount of lighting projects, and that is just unacceptable as far as I'm concerned. Less this year than last year. It is concerning to my residents as well. There was a serious assault in this park a few years ago where a woman was raped, and that's why we tried for the lighting back in 2008-09. Police were called, it was a terrible circumstance that happened and lighting through this park would improve safety dramatically. Now I've also received a letter from the Brisbane Rape and Incest Survivors Support Centre— Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, that letter is not part of that budget and it's not part of your amendment. Councillor JOHNSTON: —asking for lighting in Vallely Street Park. So, Madam Chairman, it is relevant because it is advocating for the lighting that I am calling for in the amendment

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 189 before us today. They are very concerned that women who may be subject to sexual violence or have been the subject of sexual violence, are going through dark parks at night, and they want lighting to be added to this park to increase public safety at night and they say, “Vallely Street Park provides a pedestrian route from Fairfield Train Station to busy roads such as Ipswich Road and Venner Road. Without lighting, pedestrians using public transport at night, must take longer routes home”. Now, Madam Chairman, this Council has acknowledged that this is an important project, because in 2009-10 it planned to install the lights. However, it has failed to fund them. So as a result, Madam Chairman, this amendment before us today is calling for funding to be transferred from the nice to haves, like fountains, like the Witton Barracks Parks, and other areas, into essential safety lighting. We don't want to see another Sophie in this city because there is not enough light. So I urge all Councillors to support the increased lighting. On the second point of the amendment before us today, this one is a no brainer. After the 2011 floods, this Council undertook an independent review which recommended 51—51 locations around Brisbane for backflow valves. I am still waiting and my community is waiting for nine to be done in my area. Now it is unacceptable, unacceptable that this Council will fund things like fountains and parks without funding the backflow valves recommended by engineers as a result of the 2011 floods. Councillor ADAMS has said they're not going to happen because they don't benefit anybody. Well that's not true. That is not true, because hundreds, if not thousands, of residents will benefit from backflow valves to stop the increase of flooding before a major event. Yes, it doesn't stop the river breaking the banks, we know that, but 24 hours before the 2011 flood, residents in Graceville, residents in Fairfield, residents in Tennyson and residents in Yeronga, experienced backflow flooding that cut them off from their evacuation and escape route. This is what backflow valves do. They prevent that flooding, they keep the water out in the Brisbane River for longer, and they give those residents more time to evacuate. It will also help mitigate flooding in some cases altogether. Secondly, drainage on the southside has been fundamentally and systematically neglected by this Administration for as long as I have been here. For many years there was zero funding for drainage on the southside and whilst that has increased, it is still 60% to 80% of the funding every single year goes to the northside. I can tell you that on my side of the river, we need drainage. The Council reports that exist today show that there is a need. We have over 200 drainage projects waiting to be funded in Tennyson Ward on the PIP— 200 individual upgrades that need to be taken in almost every suburb that I represent and out of a $3 billion budget, this Council is only spending $22 million on drainage and backflow valves, shame on you, shame on you. That is not acceptable in any way, shape or form to neglect the essential amount of drainage and backflow valves our community needs. These are the suburbs where residents are being hit with rates rises in excess of six per cent. So they've been shouldering the load of funding this budget year after year—same last year, over six per cent. In fact, Chelmer, Graceville, and Sherwood had the highest rates rises last year in the city. So we are shouldering the load of raising revenue for this Council, but it's not being invested back into our community, nor are developer's infrastructure charge funds being invested back out into drainage in our community. The Yeronga Retirement Village has been charged millions of dollars in infrastructure levies and it can be spent on improving this drainage. On the PIP its funded, there are Council plans. The only thing stopping it is this LORD MAYOR will not invest the necessary funds that we have, that we have either through infrastructure charges or that are being allocated $2.5 million to that Witton Barracks Park last year, and now are putting another million in. That should be going on backflow valves—absolutely going on backflow valves.

Fountains, we don't need fountains LORD MAYOR. Our residents need drainage. They need backflow valves. They need you to be a man of courage to deliver on the recommendations of the AECOM and Max Winders reports, and deliver the backflow valves that are recommended to assist our residents, who two or three times a year in my area experience localised flooding and who get cut off. Now LORD MAYOR, I don't want there to be another flood, but there will be, there will be. We will not as a city be prepared, because you are fundamentally and systematically underinvesting in the necessary drainage and the necessary stormwater infrastructure that we need as a city. Now I would urge all Councillors to look at the fact that this $100,000 for the lighting is going to improve safety for women and to improve safety for commuters, and schoolchildren who are moving between Fairfield Rail Station and Ipswich Road. It's been on the agenda since 2009, and the plans are there to be rolled out. We also need to increase our investment in drainage and backflow valves, and I urge all Councillors to support the amendment today. Chairman: Further speakers? Councillor—this is on the amendment. Councillor JOHNSTON, right of reply. Councillor JOHNSTON: Right, so for the record so everybody understands, they didn't want me to move the amendment. Now they won't even speak to it. Presumably they're about to just vote it down without discussion. So I want to be clear about what the amendment is, it is asking for $2.355 million to be moved from Fountains and Water Features to $100,000 for lighting in Vallely Street Park— Councillor WINES: Point of order, Madam Chairman. I just have a question. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor WINES. Councillor WINES: Right now Councillor JOHNSTON is providing a response to the debate, but since she was only responding to herself, does she have a right of response to herself under the rules of debate? Chairman: I will allow it to proceed Councillor WINES, given that no other Councillor took up the opportunity. There is in the Meetings Local Law a right of reply. Councillor JOHNSTON: I'm embarrassed by their silence, Madam Chairman. Embarrassed and shamed into standing up to stop me saying that in a debate on this amendment, not a single LNP Councillor stood up to justify their position with respect to this amendment. Instead, they want to say that my summing up and calling them on their behaviour is inappropriate. Well that just sums up what I think is a shocking morning for you lot, because this is a genuine amendment that you won't even address. I can tell you that from your wards all over this city people have been contacting me about the problems with drainage, and my residents absolutely, absolutely are concerned about this issue. I'm not telling them what to do. I report facts. In my budget newsletter I send out a note saying there's $22 million for drainage. There's zero for Tennyson Ward. That's a fact. That's what's in this budget and instead vitriol and abuse. That's what my residents cop and that's not on. So I'm — Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, that's not appropriate to make a statement like that. Councillor JOHNSTON: Vitriol and abuse, Madam Chairman, and I haven't referred to anybody in particular, so if I'm breaching a Meetings Local Law, please tell me which one I'm breaching. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, you need to proceed with your right of reply. Councillor JOHNSTON: I'm sorry I didn't—okay well I'll just continue then.

So I am here representing the residents that elected me and these are important safety and amenity projects that they are seeking. This Council has both the plans in place to deliver both of these items but has simply refused to fund them, year after year. The drainage plans for Yeronga have been there since 2000. The lighting plans for Vallely Street Park and Lagonda Street Park have been there since 2009-10. These plans exist. They are in the PIP. All we need is this LORD MAYOR to have courage and to fairly fund important safety and amenity projects, not only for my residents, but also for other residents of the southside who are also waiting for backflow valves, and that includes wards like Moorooka, Salisbury, areas like that. Councillor SRI has probably still got some outstanding. So I just want to see this LORD MAYOR do the right thing by ratepayers in my area who pay the highest rates in the city and this year are seeing some of the highest increases, and yet they're not receiving the basic infrastructure that is necessary to support safe and liveable communities, and that is absolutely not on as far as I'm concerned.

Amendment put: The Chairman put the motion for the amendment to the Chamber resulting in it being declared lost on the voices.

Councillor JOHNSTON: Division.

The division lapsed for want of a seconder.

Chairman: The call for division is not supported. The amendment is defeated. I will now return to the substantive program of Clean, Green and Sustainable City, Program 3. Any speakers? Councillor BOURKE. Councillor BOURKE: Thanks, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I just rise to enter the debate on Program 3, which is the item we have before us today. I just want to commend the LORD MAYOR and Councillor McLACHLAN on putting together a fantastic program of works to continue to keep Brisbane as a sustainable city, indeed Australia's Most Sustainable City, Madam Chairman, and a clean, green city as well. Madam Chairman, just turning to a couple of items in the program before us, I'm pleased to see some local park upgrades, Jindalee Park, Newcombe Park are going to be upgraded as part of the funding allocated in this year's budget. There's also works being carried out, Madam Chairman, to Rocks Riverside Park to upgrade the toilets. There's significant demand on the toilets in Rocks Riverside Park, Madam Chairman, due to park run and its 500-odd people who are there on a Saturday morning, as well as the over 2,000 people each day on a weekend, who visit that wonderful facility. So it's great to see investments being made there, Madam Chairman. Turning to drainage, Madam Chairman, it's with great interest I read in the schedules on the budget book that in the Major Drainage schedule, there are eight projects, four of them are on the northside of the river, four of them are on the southside of the river, Madam Chairman. One of them is in my ward, Balfour Street Park drainage down there in Darra, and I know that the residents down there in Balfour Street, Madam Chairman, are looking forward to that project. It is actually going to relieve a significant amount of flooding that occurs for them. Every time it rains they get large amounts of water through parts of their property, Madam Chairman. So actually through their properties, not just into

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 192 their backyards, and so it's good to see that we're taking the concerns of those residents seriously and providing relief to them, Madam Chairman. On the issue though, I just want to touch on another point which is around backflow devices because in this place. Madam Chairman, we hear a lot of debate and a lot of points being put forward around backflow and drainage projects in general. I know from my time as the Chairman for Parks, Environment and Sustainability, Madam Chairman, the officers would diligently each year prepare a schedule of works around drainage, and they would take into account a number of factors. One of the most important things that we look at when we're preparing that schedule, Madam Chairman, is the benefit to residents and the cost, because obviously there are an allocation that's provided each year, and we need to make sure that we're spending that money to provide the relief and the protection to the most number of residents possible. That's why it's great to see the allocation this year in the budget to also for the Residential Assistance Program. So it's not just about moving people out of their homes, Madam Chairman, it's also about changing people's homes potentially so that they can stay living where they are, but minimise or reduce the flooding on the site. That leads me to backflows, Madam Chairman, because we hear a lot about backflow devices, but I remember from my time as Chair, when we did those initial reports that have been mentioned in this place, that a number of the sites in my own ward and Councillor SIMMONDS’ ward, in other wards that are along the river, Madam Chairman, that had backflow devices that were recommended. As part of that study and as part of that work, a number of those locations were also identified as not necessarily being a priority because the source of flooding was not from the actual stormwater system, Madam Chairman, it came from bank bursting. So the water actually came over the top of the Brisbane River banks and flooded people's homes. So if you'd spent the money to install a backflow device, it would not have actually stopped a 2011 flood event for that property. I'll say that again, even if you'd spent the money for the backflow device, it would not have stopped the 2011 flood event from flooding that property. So with that in mind, Madam Chairman, you have to take that into context of the allocation of funding that's put forward and who needs the relief. So should we go and spend $6 million to complete the last 10 backflow devices, Madam Chairman, that were recommended in the report, that would not have actually provided that relief to those properties because the river burst its banks, to do those 10 devices, or should we spend the money to deliver relief to residents who on a weekly or monthly or yearly basis may experience flooding in their properties. Well, Madam Chairman, I would be on the side of trying to provide the best relief to the most people who experience flooding the most often. I would challenge anyone in this place to stand up and put an ultimate view, because as custodians of the city and as custodians of ratepayers’ money, we're elected and we're here to provide the judgement and the best course of action to provide that surety to residents, to give them confidence that Council understands their concerns and that we are investing our money to do the best we can, in terms of providing relief for flooding across this city, because we know this city is built on a flood plain. We have multiple sources of flooding, so you have overland flow, you have storm surge, Madam Chairman, you have creek flooding and you have river flooding. We don't get river flooding on a regular basis, but when we do it is quite significant. We get more creek flooding than we do river flooding, and we need to make sure that we're balancing our investment, because we know the backflow devices aren't the silver bullet in solving flooding in our city. So every time that someone stands up in here and waxes on about the need to invest and build all these backflow devices, I would just encourage everyone just to take a moment to pause and consider the allocation in the scheme of what

this city actually faces when this city when it comes to flooding. To consider that investment and the number of properties that it may protect, but it would not have protected in 2011, Madam Chairman, versus the properties and the residents that we are protecting, with the investments that we do each year through our major drainage budget and our minor drainage budget, because that is what we are here to do. That is what we are elected to do and it is very important, Madam Chairman, that you take it all into consideration. I have the utmost faith, as I imagine Councillor McLACHLAN does as well, in the Council officers' assessment and their due diligence that they do on these projects to make sure that the allocations that are provided by the LORD MAYOR, are being spent to provide the best protection to the residents who need it in our city, from all forms of flooding on a basis, that the allocation needs to protect as many residents as possible each year. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SUTTON. Councillor SUTTON: Thank you, Madam Chairman, just very quickly on this program but before I do, Madam Chairman, with your indulgence, can I just acknowledge the passing of the Honourable Con Sciacca yesterday. Con was someone that was always very good to me, I know in my political career and a great friend of Brisbane, and he'll be sadly missed and thank you for that indulgence. I'm not going to speak very much on this program. There are a number of things in it that I could, both as a local Councillor and more broadly. I'm really just getting to my feet in this program to talk about one particular line item. That is the $167,000 that has been allocated for investigation work into the Vectis Street Park investigation—the remediation. Look, and it would be remiss of me if I didn't, because I really do need to thank Councillor McLACHLAN for ensuring that was in the budget this year. On at least two occasions I've got to my feet in the last 12 months and talked about what an important project this is, for me as a local Councillor, but also more broadly my local community and the local sporting clubs, not just in Morningside Ward, but potentially it may benefit Coorparoo Ward and sports club even in The Gabba Ward in the eastern suburbs. I just—you know a lot of times when you're in Opposition, you think no one's listening. I just want to thank Councillor McLACHLAN for listening and being prepared to put some money on the table to at least take that first step in investigating this important initiative. I think that if the Administration follows through on funding in subsequent years, this will be a great asset to the city into the future, and I just didn't want to let debate on this program go by without recording my thanks. Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SUTTON. Councillor ALLAN. Councillor ALLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to eventually join the debate and speak on Program 3 – Clean, Green, Sustainable. Brisbane has made significant headway in being recognised by residents and visitors as a clean, green and sustainable city. Indeed, securing the award as Australia's Most Sustainable City from Keep Australia Beautiful in two of the last three years, not only establishes our credentials, but also contributes significantly to our lifestyle and leisure aspirations, which combined truly position Brisbane as a New World City. Residents of Brisbane are passionate about the environment and liveability of our city and expect Council to take an active lead, and we have taken on that challenge. The Brisbane. Clean, Green, Sustainable 2017-2031 strategy outlines Council's vision for Brisbane to be a top 10 lifestyle city globally. Achieving this goal will entail protecting our natural environment including caring for biodiversity, waterways, wetlands, urban forests and parks.

Madam Chairman, this program focuses on five key outcomes which are relevant to all wards. Outcome 1, Sustainable and Resilient Community, which focuses on building a community which is inclusive, cohesive, understands risk, and is able to plan, prepare and respond to and recover from shocks independently and in partnership with government. Additionally, it supports our sustainability aspirations through protection of our natural environment. Outcome 2, Low Carbon and Clean Environment, which focuses on Council being carbon neutral. Indeed, Brisbane City Council is Australia's largest carbon neutral organisation. Additionally, it encourages residents and businesses to be conscious of their carbon footprint and greenhouse gas emissions. Outcome 3, Biodiversity, Urban Forests and Parks, which focuses on protecting and enhancing the biodiversity, health and resilience of our open space, habitats, streetscapes, plants and animals. Outcome 4, Sustainable Water Management, which focuses on a WaterSmart city that manages, and uses water and stormwater wisely and sustainably, and protects our waterways and properties. Certainly, there are sporting groups in the Northgate Ward that benefit from this program through stormwater harvesting. Outcome 5, Managing and Reducing Brisbane's Waste and Litter, focuses on managing the city's waste in a holistic and sustainable way where resource recovery opportunities are maximised and innovation is pursued. These outcomes are critical to the liveability and sustainability of our New World City. Council understands that our city, and as our wards grow and develop our rich biodiversity, blue-green assets, flora and fauna, and infrastructure will support Brisbane's liveability and lifestyle outcomes. This program is focused on managing the sustainability of our city to provide for the future prosperity of Brisbane, and to achieve Council's long-term vision for Brisbane, to be a world leading, clean, green and sustainable city. From a Northgate Ward perspective, we have a rich mix of elements to consider in our clean, green and sustainable mix. We have a number of waterways including the significant Kedron Brook down to smaller creeks Nundah Creek and Downfall Creek. We have the Boondall Wetlands with a varied mix of flora and fauna that adjoins Moreton Bay. We also have the Nudgee Waterhole Reserve with its unique characteristics and history. We have a significant number and variety of parks ranging from small suburban parks, through to the huge parklands that run along Kedron Brook from the western side of the ward to the east. Scattered across the ward, we have a number of urban forests. Perhaps on the flip side of this coin, Councillor MATIC, we also have the Nudgee Resource Recovery Centre. As a regular user of this facility, I've been particularly pleased to see how the centre has been adapted to cater for recyclables and green waste, and how the community has been responding to these options. These observations are confirmed by Council's own data which indicates that domestic waste to landfill is falling while recycling is rising. Madam Chairman, while the Green Heart Fair is not held in the Northgate Ward, it is just across the border in Marchant Ward, it is attended and enjoyed by Northgate residents. So I am pleased to see funding continued for this event. Key projects that have been earmarked for Northgate Ward in the coming financial year include: rehabilitation of the sites at the Hendra Pony Club at Northgate and Shaw Park at Wavell Heights, which are old landfill sites that are used for recreation; weed removal at the Boondall Wetlands at Nudgee Beach; refurbishment of the dog off leash area at Nudgee Waterhole Reserve; enhanced park lighting at Patrea Street Park, Banyo; a carpark upgrade at Showground Park, Nudgee; upgrades at St Vincents Road Park, Nudgee; and a stormwater drainage project at Carter Street, Northgate. Before finishing, I'd like to touch upon a subdivision project that is an excellent tangible example of this Administration's clean, green and sustainable city

strategy. The project, which is nearing completion, was a collaboration between Council and the subdivision developer at Nudgee. The developer, with input from Council and external specialists, have cleared invasive weed and tree species, and replanted 74,000 native plantings, and returned the site on Nundah Creek to Council. This will provide the community with natural green space that has been rehabilitated for the enjoyment of future generations. While we are on the topic of new trees, I note Councillor JOHNSTON's comments earlier, regarding cuts to funding for new trees and wonder if these trees were the trees where the money grows. In conclusion, I'd like to thank the LORD MAYOR, Councillor McLACHLAN, and Councillor MATIC for their ongoing energy, and support, in progressing this program to a standard which by many measures is absolutely best practice for councils, and indeed any organisation. I'd also like to thank the many Council officers who have contributed to this extensive program. I commend the program to the Chamber. Thank you. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak on Program 3, and I might pick up where Councillor ALLAN left off, which is to note that trees are an asset to the city and shouldn't be conceptualised as a cost or a liability. They provide a range of ecosystem services including cooling streets, improving pedestrian comfort and amenity, cleaning the air—I could go on but my point is that to conceptualise them as a cost that the city has to bear, rather than an asset which saves us money in other areas of the budget, I think is a mistake and we need to reflect on that. Particularly, I'm concerned by suggestions that the budget allocations for tree planting and maintenance have been cut, and I note that it's much cheaper for Council to maintain these established trees than to neglect them and then have to spend money replacing lost canopy cover down the track. So if we have big old trees, they do need maintenance, they need arborists and that does take money, but it's better to pay those arborists to conduct regular ongoing maintenance, than to wait until the tree gets old or diseased, has to be removed, more replanting has to occur. That's far more expensive. I note that while Council spends a great deal of money on planting trees and maintaining biodiversity corridors, we're also seeing much of that hard work undone by unsustainable development, and that's probably not captured accurately in our current costings, but we need to acknowledge that significant detriment to the city, when established street trees which Council officers have spent a lot of money maintaining, are then cut down to make way for new development projects due to poor planning, and due to the fact that arborists haven't been given enough time to provide detailed expert advice in making those development assessments. So thinking specifically about Service 3.1.1.2, Partnerships for a Clean Green City, I want to encourage Councillors in this place, and maybe most of the Councillors aren't listening but to those that are and hopefully to the Council officers, particularly in Councillor's McLACHLAN's department, to move towards a stewardship focus model where we acknowledge that certainly as a Green—I would love to see more money spent on maintaining vegetation and planting and preserving trees, et cetera, but it does cost a lot of money. A huge amount of money, and the more trees we plant, the more it's going to cost and I get that. There's a huge untapped resource of community goodwill, and people who are willing to get involved in volunteer community projects. I know many Councillors have those projects in their ward, but I also know that resources and funding for those programs have been stripped back.

So we need to be—I'm talking about—Councillor McLACHLAN is shaking his head and I look forward to hearing—I might have it wrong and I appreciate the dialogue, but I think there's a lot more money that we could be allocating towards those conservation partnership programs, towards paying Council staff to coordinate and connect with volunteers. There's a huge untapped resource there. I'm mindful that while many Brisbane residents enjoy public parks and spaces, they're generally seen as Council's parks rather than the people's parks. I think that's an important distinction, where a lot of residents, and I'm not saying all residents, but a lot of residents feel like taking care of a park, taking care of street trees is someone else's responsibility and that's what they pay rates for. I actually think that if we spend the money and say, look we'll provide resources for community conservation groups, for bush care groups, for creek catchment groups to do a better job of coordinating volunteer resources, it will enrich the community, it will improve connections between neighbours and it will lead to better quality outcomes for our creeks, for our bushland reserves, and for our parks. So I also wanted to talk briefly about Council's high waste disposal costs, and I applaud the funding for programs such as the Love Food Hate Waste initiative, and I think the recent support for the Community Compost program, and I'm full of praise for it. I think we can be spending even more money on those sorts of programs, and I hope those allocations increase in the near future, and again I'm at pains to mention that it's not a zero-sum game, where I'm not saying spend big, increase all the funding for this, it will be worth it. I'm saying that if we spend that money on those sorts of programs, we will significantly reduce our waste disposal costs. I know Council officers understand that. I'm sure that Councillors are coming around to that frame of mind, but rather than using the new small incremental tweaks to our current system, we should have a much stronger push away from the production of waste. We're actually behind public sentiment in this sense. The general public has a very strong appetite for supported programs that help them reduce their waste. There's a public appetite for a more nuanced recycling system where people divide up their stuff rather than chucking it all into one recycling bin. These are conversations that we should be having. I know it sounds—I'm seeing Councillors on the other side of the Chamber shaking their heads. Just talk to residents about it. Ask them— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor SRI: Ask them what they're up for and sometimes you'll be surprised, but we do have to lead in this space as well. It's not enough to just say some residents aren't going to want to separate recyclables or some residents aren't going to want to reduce the amount of waste they're chucking into landfill. Let's lead them. Let's bring them. Let's present them with the information and shows them that it's cheaper for them, that their ratepayer dollars could be better used if they reduce their waste. I also want to draw attention to ongoing concerns about stormwater drainage in Woolloongabba and East Brisbane. I heard Councillor BOURKE's comments, and I understand that argument, and I'm at pains to emphasise that in this particular area, yes okay it's the facts, I understand that, no need to get defensive. What I'm saying is, the flooding in this area is largely caused because overland rainwater and overland flowing water doesn't have enough space to get out into the creek system. So it's not that the creek is rising and back flooding, or that the river is rising and back flooding, it's simply that we have a lot of rain falling in the area and our current drainage capacity isn't enough to clear it quickly.

We also have a related problem which is the increase in impervious services. We're seeing a lot more high density construction in this area, a lot more concrete and bitumen, and that means that less rain is soaked into the soil and more rain just flows overland and floods neighbouring properties. It's been particularly bad down around Sword Street and Deshon Street, but it's also bad in other parts of East Brisbane. I understand that there are plans that have been sitting on Council's system for a while now, but that the money hasn't been allocated and I would like to hear maybe from Councillor McLACHLAN about what plans there are for the future of that Deshon Street Park precinct of Woolloongabba, because it floods every time there's heavy rain, and it seems like the flooding is getting worse as there are more high density developments going into the area. This isn't as simple as a distinction between concrete versus grass. We also need to be thinking as a Council about distinctions between hard packed surfaces and soil and like those harder surfaces that are impervious, as opposed to soft soil garden beds and vegetated areas that will absorb more rainwater and reduce overland flooding. So I'm offering these suggestions in good faith that they'll be taken on board and I hope they're taken seriously, but I have serious concerns that Council is not spending the money around Woolloongabba to address flooding and stormwater drainage issues. We're also not capturing any of that rainwater for irrigation purposes and that's a huge resource that we're letting go to waste. So I implore Council to think more about allocating money in that respect. I'm also concerned about, again, the failure to allocate any money for park acquisition anywhere in the northern part of Woolloongabba along Annerley Road. That area is undergoing a process of densification but it is already underserved by public parks. I get a lot of residents in West End complaining about the lack of public green space, but it is actually worse in that little pocket of Woolloongabba around Gabba Hill where there's not a single useable public park owned by Council within walking distance. You have to cross busy roads and head all the way down the hill to get to the nearest park. It's an unreasonable burden for older residents with mobility issues, or for parents with young children who just want to take their kids out to throw a frisbee around. We need to allocate the money for a new park in that part of Woolloongabba, and I'm disappointed that that money hasn't been allocated yet again, and I hope Councillor McLACHLAN will take on board the concerns of residents that I'm conveying to you. This isn't just coming from me, this is coming from dozens and dozens of residents who are frustrated that there isn't enough usable green space in their area. Finally, I just want to note, I see the allocation for the West End Riverside Land Remediation has been rolled over. I'm glad to see that funding still there. My understanding is that Council will be faced with a choice between spending a little bit of extra money and preserving some very large established fig trees, or I think they're fig trees along the river there, or spending a little bit less money to do the remediation, but then will lose those very large, very old trees that have been there for a lot longer than I can remember. So I'd just ask Councillor McLACHLAN to clarify if possible, will those trees be protected and does the allocation for the West End Riverside Land Remediation include funding to ensure those trees are maintained? Thank you. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor HOWARD. Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak to Program 3. Madam Chairman, all of us here want a clean, green and sustainable Brisbane, which is why I am proud to support the initiatives included in Budget 2017-18

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 198 that will make our city more liveable and sustainable for our children and their children to follow. As a proud Councillor for Central Ward, I'm thrilled that this budget continues the legacy of the QUIRK Administration to protect and enhance Brisbane's Green Heart. Madam Chairman, New Farm is awash with colour thanks to the work of Council as part of its Service 3.1.3.1, Renewing Great Brisbane Gardens initiative. Through you, Madam Chairman, to Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI, I'd like you to come down and visit New Farm Park on the weekend where I can assure you it is the people's park. We have people from all over Brisbane—in fact I ran into our DEPUTY MAYOR and his family at one of the afternoons that I was there, and it truly is one of the most beautiful parks that we have in Brisbane. Madam Chairman, another budget initiative that I'm excited about is Strategy 3.3.3, which relates to enhancing and maintaining park and street trees across Brisbane, or as I like to call it ‘boulevarding Brisbane’. Since becoming Councillor for Central Ward, I have worked hard to make Brisbane's inner city even greener, and one of the ways I have delivered this is by turning our major road corridors into subtropical boulevards that will increase Brisbane's tree canopy and turn our roads into beautiful green assets. Already, Brunswick Street, Boundary Street, and Gregory Terrace feature beautiful gardens along the footpaths which are flourishing, and in years to come will provide a spectacular green canopy for Brisbane's inner city. I'm thrilled that more plantings will soon happen along Merthyr Road. Madam Chairman, I'm pleased that in Program 3.3.5.2, $114,000 will be spent to restore the landmark American War Memorial and rotunda which are located in the beautiful grounds of Newstead House. I'm also excited that Bowen Hills community will benefit from a $30,000 upgrade to Jeays Street Park infrastructure which will include new outdoor gym equipment and landscaping improvements. Madam Chairman, this upgrade of Jeays Street Park is listed in 3.3.4.2, and is critically important as the State Government continues to allow more and more high rise development in Bowen Hills, with thousands of new residents expected to call the suburb home over the next few years. Madam Chairman, as Bowen Hills is effectively landlocked, it is incredibly important that we as a Council do all that we can to protect and enhance outdoor spaces in the area to ensure residents have a place to breathe, relax and exercise. Already the work Council has done in Jeays Street has been warmly welcomed by local residents, many of whom love the tranquillity and the respite that this green space provides. Madam Chairman, over the next year I will also be working closely with the local community to improve Waterfront Park at Newstead. Waterfront Park, although a relatively new park, is already a much loved green space in this growing community, and one which we think can be made even more enjoyable and accessible. Madam Chairman, I could go on and on talking about the many initiatives in this program that will benefit my ward of Central and for which I would like to thank Councillor McLACHLAN and Councillor MATIC, and their officers, but I would briefly like to talk about Section 3.5 and in particular Service 3.5.2.1, which deals with City Cleansing. Now Madam Chairman, one of the things that most disappoints me is that despite the efforts of our hard working Council officers, who diligently do all they can to keep our streets, roadways, footpaths and parks clean and litter free, there is a group of people in this city who continually disrespect our local by-laws and continually trash, for want of a better word, our majestic surroundings. That group, Madam Chairman, is the Greens. So let's look at the facts—and you know it is their arrogance and their complete disregard for Council assets that make my blood boil. So through you, Madam Chairman, to Councillor SRI, I very much hope that you can help turn the tide on what is happening in my beautiful Ward of Central.

Madam Chairman, what is becoming more frequent in the streets of Central Ward is that the Greens are targeting some of our assets. They're vandalising our rubbish bins, our street poles, our footpaths, our bus stops. Our building walls are being covered in propaganda. Councillors interjecting. Councillor HOWARD: So Council— Chairman: Order! Councillor HOWARD: Council-owned— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Just—point of order, Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Is this relevant to the budget? Councillors interjecting. Councillor HOWARD: Yes. Service 3.5.2.1— Chairman: Sorry, Councillor HOWARD, I haven't given a ruling yet and I don't need everybody else to chime in and give their own opinion. We are talking about Clean, Green and Sustainable City and Councillor HOWARD was being most relevant when she was talking about the cleanliness of our city and impacts of vandalism on some of our assets. Councillor HOWARD. Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, Council-owned rubbish bins along Brunswick Street have posters glued to them, promoting fundraisers for the Greens. Pavements are often chalked with messages championing their latest cause, bus stops in the CBD and Valley are often graffitied with their slogans and campaigns. Madam Chairman, there is not one rule for them and one rule for the others. There is one rule, and the majority of Brisbane residents adhere to that, but for some reason the Greens seem to think that they are above it. Can you imagine their outrage if this Administration or the Opposition glued their material to Council-owned assets? They would be beside themselves in anger. Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: I just want to note, with the greatest of respect— Chairman: No, Councillor SRI, you don't make statements. Councillor SRI: Sorry, I'm making my point of order. I'm conscious that Councillor HOWARD is making an adverse reflection on a political party and I understand— Chairman: No, Councillor SRI— Councillor SRI: No, no— Chairman: Councillor SRI, this is the place for people to put political debate and that is not an appropriate point of order. Councillor SRI: So, Madam Chairman, what I'm saying is that Councillor HOWARD is asserting that a political party has engaged in illegal criminal action, and I understand that there's an important distinction between Greenie activists and the Greens as a political party, and I think if she's going to— Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Stop—Councillor SRI, this is a point of order is—order! Councillor SRI: I am. Chairman: Order! Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Councillor SRI, a point of order is not a platform for you to rise and have a second bite at the debate. It's not an appropriate point of order. Please resume your seat. Councillor HOWARD. Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I don't want to hear their excuses. I don't care what their excuses are and there is no excuse for it. I want them to stop it. I want them to apologise to our Council officers who repeatedly have to follow them up cleaning up their mess. As I said earlier, Madam Chairman, Council officers work very hard and are proud of their efforts to keep Brisbane clean. The residents of Brisbane recognise and appreciate the efforts of Council in ensuring our city shines and that it is truly a clean, green and sustainable city. I commend the program to the Chamber. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor RICHARDS. Councillor RICHARDS: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak on Program 3 – Clean, Green and Sustainable and the forward projects. The Pullenvale Ward are grateful for what they shall receive in the 2017-18 financial year budget that will continue making our city liveable and sustainable for our children and their children to follow. It is this Administration, thanks to the LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK, through this Council that reaches out to build partnerships, with all sectors of the community, through our Community Conservation Partnerships Program and private landholders to undertaking environmental restoration and rehabilitation works targeting weeds, and conservation projects for Brisbane's higher priority biodiversity and waterway areas. Council's aim is to inspire the community to value and appreciate the environment, foster an understanding of each person's responsibilities, and support the community in being stewards of the environment. I am proud to say and acknowledge the community and private landholders of the Pullenvale Ward, who are extremely active in participating in the Community Conservation Partnerships Program, and who individually are active in planting on their own acreage properties to protect that biodiversity. Assistance is available to individuals and groups to deliver on groundwork that otherwise would be difficult for groups or individuals to undertake. It's through Council providing support for the efforts of Brisbane residents and community groups through the Community Conservation Partnerships Program, including Creek Catchment Officers, Habitat Brisbane Groups and the Wildlife Conservation Partnerships Program, to achieve improved environmental outcomes through sustainable behaviours, participating in bushland restoration, and caring for Brisbane's wildlife. So, Madam Chairman, I need to clear up some suggested assumptions by another in this place. We spend substantial funds for environmental conservation and community conservation groups. Maybe to another Councillor in this place, should consider my open invitation for you to come with me out into the Pullenvale Ward to see the facts regarding conservation, and the engagement from volunteer community groups, who are actively protecting our biodiversity.

You should seek to understand how this budget in its whole works, instead of assuming and segmenting it. You must take into account how the whole machinations as that will serve you in local government. So facts first—as Brisbane City Council was named in 2016, Australia's Most Sustainable City, and in 2014. We may have Greens in this place, yet this Council has been delivering for years now and is still excelling in protecting our green space in Brisbane, keeping it clean, green and sustainable. Ensuring our speaking platforms are on facts instead of assumptions, you will see what we're delivering. So, Madam Chairman, through the Conservation Reserves Management Program, Shelley Road Park, Kholo, natural area fencing will occur and for Changing Mountain Bushland in Kholo, shall occur also in this financial year. The Conservation Reserves Management aims to manage conservation and other natural assets to deliver an effective balance between sustaining their ecological value and enhancing their recreation and education values. Parks Maintenance and Renewal, it aims to maintain, refurbish and replace park assets, so they are fit for purpose while being accessible to all of the community. So this coming financial year we will see the dog off-leash area refurbishment for Pioneer Crescent Park in Bellbowrie, occur which we will actually be trialling something very new, that is done over in Europe, is sand instead of turf in a section of the dog off-leash area, with more details to come over the coming months with community corner sessions in the park. The enhanced safety lighting for Pioneer Crescent Park in Bellbowrie, has been long awaited. Which will improve safe accessibility through this very large park precinct for commuters and use of the shared pathway with cyclists. The Park Access Assets Maintenance and Rehabilitation will occur for the Pullenvale Forest Park, and we'll see the entry carpark graded and pathways within the Pullenvale Forest Park rehabilitated, as this green space area is a high use are for bird watchers and bushwalkers. Westaway Park in Moggill will also have timber bollards replaced due to termite and dry rot damage. Park Infrastructure, Gym Facilities and Landscape Upgrades for Akuna Street Park in Kenmore, Creekside Park in Kenmore, and Dillingen Street Park in Chapel Hill, will be welcome additions to the ward. Now the gem in the eye of Brisbane, and I am biased I do apologise, is the Mt Coot-tha precinct. It's our continued commitment to manage and promote the Mt Coot-tha Botanic Gardens as a significant horticultural leisure, learning and tourism destination will occur over the coming financial year. Reinforcing Mt Coot-tha as the premier destination for ecotourism in Brisbane, through the completion of the Mt Coot-tha Visitor Information Centre, that will be the premier facility that links all attractions available at Mt Coot-tha, including Botanic Gardens, the Planetarium, the Mt Coot-tha Summit and a diverse range of other recreational activities. It is exciting that this Council will continue to deliver the Mt Coot-tha Enhancement program including new walking trails, major upgrades to Simpson Falls and JC Slaughter Falls, and of course a zipline. Enhancements will be made to the paths and tracks with the Mt Coot-tha Forest Reserve and Botanic Gardens. These enhancements will further improve the accessibility, recreation and tourism experience of this destination. So, Madam Chairman, I want to acknowledge the team of the Natural Environment at Asset Services West, the City Projects Office, and subsequent contractors who delivered this morning a 22-metre bridge through into JC Slaughter Falls to connect up the walking path to Simpson Falls. It certainly is going to be a very improved walking track. The other addition to our ward is a fishing platform at Moggill Ferry Park which will be Stage 1. It's a welcomed addition for our leisure and lifestyle opportunities over this coming year.

So, Madam Chairman, Pullenvale Ward is rich in country lifestyle, yet close to the city living, that offers so much to its residents, be it acreage living, tennis courts, swimming pools, horse arenas, stables, dressage arenas, and many other areas including cattle and the respective infrastructure needs for that. They do also progress a lot of the land for wildlife as well. These are just a few benefits of living in this magnificent epitome of leisure and lifestyle opportunity in Brisbane. Council has set itself a target of 40% natural habitat cover across the Council's local government area. What has become evident from the residents of Pullenvale Ward is that this comprises public land in public ownership, such as the Brisbane Forest Park as well as land in private ownership. The burden of these scheme changes will fall heavily on the owners of acreage such as the residents of the western suburbs, and it will limit their rights to use their private land in the way they wish in terms of private recreation, the keeping of livestock and the building of the infrastructure associated with those purposes. Most residents living on acreage are experienced in managing their properties. Many have been involved in planting native vegetation in areas away from their houses and recreation areas, yet without the owner of the scheme changes fully understanding what the value of country living really is to the people in the Pullenvale Ward is a great concern. To ensure Brisbane's 35% natural habitat stays on track for 40%, is something that needs to be understood by ground-truth in the areas of interest within the western suburbs. As the Pullenvale Ward will be viewed more desirably to achieve this target, and this ward being 318 square kilometres, with 107 square kilometres completely uninhabitable green space, and is known for its country lifestyle, yet what impact will it be for the residents of the western suburbs for this percentage to be achieved. So I look forward to working and seeking to understand what the vision is for Brisbane for the Pullenvale Ward to work towards this benchmark. Also, it is certainly great news that this Council, partnering with the Lone Pine and the Walter Taylor Ward, to deliver a Koala Research Centre to assist protecting Australia's most iconic native animal species that travel in the natural environment of the Pullenvale Ward as well. So thank you, Madam Chairman. I look forward to voting on this Program. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING: Thanks, Madam Chair. Just a couple of points in relation to waste management—I'm disappointed with the failure of this Administration to increase recycling levels. We saw recently that the target for recycling back in 2013 was 100,000 tonnes. By 2020 it was supposed to be 150,000 tonnes, and the recent green policy amalgamation booklet that was put out it said the current level of recycling was about 100,000 tonnes. That's in 2017, about 100,000 tonnes, but that target was supposed to have been achieved back in 2013, and you'd think if we're pro rata-ing we'd be up to about 125,000 tonnes by now. So in my view the Administration has failed to increase recycling levels, and of course my pet concern there is their treatment of small business, Madam Chairman. I know in my ward there are heaps of small businesses that would love to have a yellow recycling bin, and in fact I think they'd probably pay the extra $30 and get the bigger as well as the smaller one. These are businesses with only one or two employees, but they still get plenty of deliveries in cardboard boxes and they could fill up the bins every week with cardboard boxes. They get charged, or their landlords get charged, the same fee as residential households do for waste management, but they don't get a yellow top bin.

I've got to say they sometimes manage to get around it. Some parts of my area is light industrial area, where some way or another, a lot of the business owners have actually acquired a yellow-top bin at some stage over the years, and fill it up with recyclables and put it out. The good old Council contractor's truck comes along and picks it up, which is very good of them, but if they took a hard line on it they would refuse to pick those bins up. But that's how they get around and get away with it. Now these groups are struggling financially. They're not interested in being involved in and paying extra for an extra service, which is what the Council offers, and I don't think they should have to. If they're paying the same as residential customers they should get the same treatment as residential customers, or else they should get the fee reduced to take into account the fact that they're not getting the same service. So, Madam Chairman, I'll leave that to the Administration to decide there. The other thing I just wanted to complain about too is the spelling of some of the parks in my area. I find it's pretty amateurish to have a Council producing these—nice big booklet and then spell the name of parks in my area wrong. So I refer to page 174, Dog Off Leash Area Refurbishment; Elanora Park's spelt E-L-E-N-O-R-A. The correct spelling is E-L-A-N-O-R-A. I won't move an amendment though for that. I can see what sort of problem you get into around here if you try to move an amendment so I won't do that. Page 175 under the heading Park Access Assets Maintenance and Rehabilitation —you wouldn't want to say that too quickly would you—Drevesen Park at Manly, and it's spelt in the book D-R-E-V-E-S-T-A-N Park. Wrong. It's Drevesen Park, D-R-E-V-E-S-E-N Park. Poor old Bill Drevesen would be turning in his grave if they see how they butchered his name, Madam Chairman. It was named after a local citizen who died some years ago, but was a great stalwart of the local sailing community around Wynnum Manly. So I just think that the Administration needs to take a bit more care—a bit more care—with getting the names right, and if they want to send a booklet to me ahead of time so I can check the spelling— Councillors interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: Just the schedules that'll be alright. I'm very happy to do that, Madam Chairman. I pride myself as a bit of a proofreader. Someone will find something that's been wrongly worded soon but anyhow, but I certainly would be prepared to get those names of those parks right. Thank you. Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON. Councillor JOHNSTON: Madam Chairman, it's been brought to my attention that there are two parks that are incorrectly named in the budget before us today. Elanora Park, I believe which is incorrectly named Elenora Park on page 174 of the budget, and Drevesen Park on 175. In line with your previous rulings, Madam Chairman, in this place, these incorrect named places render this motion incompetent and I ask that you rule the budget out of order on the basis that this is an incompetent motion. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON my previous rulings have been in relation to specific motions that have been presented to this Chamber, and therefore I don't uphold your point of order. Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman. This is a specific motion to adopt the Budget that has been presented to this Chamber, and you have made it very clear in your rulings, that if there is a mistake as simple as ‘street’ or ‘avenue’, based on your own Whip’s advice, that it renders a motion incompetent if it is incorrectly named.

I ask you to apply your ruling fairly and, if this is to proceed in line with your previous rulings, somebody has to move an amendment to fix the mistakes. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON as I have just said—and I will repeat it again for you so I can make it clear and so you can understand—my previous rulings have been specifically in relation to the wording of the motions that have been submitted to this Council. In the case of this program for the budget, the motion is actually—that has been moved by Councillor McLACHLAN states, ‘I move that for the services of the Council the allocations for the Operations and the Projects for the year 2017-18 and the Rolling Projects for the Clean, Green and Sustainable City Program as contained on pages 38 to 72, and the indicative schedules on pages 172 to 180 as far as they relate to Program 3, be adopted’. So therefore I don't uphold your point of order. Councillor JOHNSTON: Point of order, Madam Chairman. As it clearly refers to, in the motion moved before us today, the schedules— which you have acknowledged yourself—and the individual projects, I move dissent in your motion.

The dissent motion lapsed for want of a seconder.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON—there's no seconder for the dissent so it is not upheld and I will draw to your attention, Councillor JOHNSTON, for further clarity that it says the word indicative schedules. Further debate? Let's move on. Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Thanks, Madam Chair— Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Stop, just a moment please Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor JOHNSTON your statement that I need to be clear when I'm going to be biased or not is an absolute disgrace. It's an appalling statement and I require that your conduct be noted in the minutes under section 186 of the City of Brisbane Act.

Order under section 186A of the City of Brisbane Act 2010 that disorderly conduct by Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON be noted in the minutes

Chairman: You do not sit in this place, and because you don't like a ruling, show total disrespect and disregard for this Chamber and the Meetings Local Law and the rulings that I have given and clearly explained to you multiple times when you're raising the same point of order repetitively. Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to enter the debate on Program 3, and do just want to pick up on something that Councillor SRI talked about earlier in terms of drainage projects, and the increasing need for investment in drainage projects in suburbs, which I talked about last year, which again weren't funded in this year's budget. There are projects there that have been identified by Council officers for this program that continue to be overlooked, and these aren't—they're in Deagon. They're on Cabbage Tree Creek, but the identified problem isn't because of creek flooding, and isn't caused by high tides either. They are drainage problems that need investment to address those, and they are issues in which habitable areas of people's houses are being flooded in major events and in minor events as well—in localised minor events as well. So to not see a dramatic increase in investment in this area is disappointing considering the dramatic increase around the city we're seeing in projects that

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 205 need to be funded as well. So I'd like to put on record my disappointment there, Madam Chair. I do want to talk a bit about the Boondall Wetlands Environment Centre, the investment that we'll see there in that amazing part of Brisbane, the Boondall Wetlands, which cover a large part—well in excess of 1,000 hectares on the northside of Brisbane, which Councillor ALLAN has talked about as well. So the current Boondall Wetlands Environment Centre is in my ward and it's very well used by local residents who like to use the area—local schools who like to include in their curriculum education about the environment and the significant environment that we have on the northside there as well. So to see a new environment centre is certainly a very good thing. I did, when this first came up last year, certainly advocate that the original building which was moved there in the 1990s—which is a very typical Queenslander building which had been retrofitted which has served the purpose very well, although in terms of modern education facilities certainly probably doesn't tick all the boxes. So to retain that building as part of this project is certainly a very good thing, and I'm glad that the community's desire there will be seen and I certainly look forward to engaging with Councillor McLACHLAN and the Council officers and the community going forward around the design and purpose of that centre, and what we can do to make sure that it meets all those needs. Moving on to park upgrades, particularly section 3.3.4.1, Park Development and Enhancement, there is certainly some big dollars in this sections for projects, but one that is consistently overlooked by the LORD MAYOR, Madam Chair, is the development of the project down at the Brighton Foreshore, something that was committed to originally as part of the broader Shorncliffe, Sandgate, Brighton Foreshore upgrade in the late 2000s. It's one of those unfinished—it's one of those projects that—and I have been on record as saying in 2011—as that funding had to be redirected to reconstruction of projects in other parts of the city—that's fair enough. That was fair enough for 2011, Madam Chair, but it's now 2017. The plans were drawn up, consultation was done on those plans back then, and year after year, election after election, every time this LORD MAYOR runs for election he promises an upgrade of the Brighton Foreshore. Then in subsequent budgets it is forgotten about year after year after year. Last election Labor proposed a significant investment, and this isn't just an investment for residents who live in Brighton or the outer northern suburbs. This is a citywide project, Madam Chair, because in Brisbane, as we know, we have two significant foreshore areas for people to use. Not only locals, but people from right across Brisbane to use those areas and for the tourism industry. We hear a lot about tourism on the Brisbane River. These are assets which this city can use to further develop that industry, and while this LORD MAYOR continues to give false hope to these people each and every election that he'll do something about it, and then subsequently never does anything whatsoever to invest in a major upgrade of the Brighton foreshore, is very disappointing. So we had a petition very recently around reallocating some money from the doomed Dowse Lagoon fountain that was pulled because—the reasons given at the time that fountain was pulled was because the funding was required from that funding and the Forest Lake fountain to be spent on the Queen's Wharf intersection upgrades. We've since found out that's apparently not the reason at all in the petition response, so there's certainly funding within this program that was committed to my local area. We hear quite often Councillor McLACHLAN talk about the $20 million that was spent on the Shorncliffe Pier project, and in the petition response it also says that figure actually was $14.6 million. So there's over $5 million there for a local project in savings, so between those two—$7.4 million—I think is a fair

amount of money that could be spent on investing in this citywide project, but unfortunately again another year passes and another year of inaction by the LNP on this project. Just moving on to waste services, Madam Chair. Something I have raised and would like to put on record here—the community of Moreton Island, and particular Kooringal at the southern end of Moreton Island, has waste services obviously, and their kerbside collection's a bit different to those of which we have here on the mainland. They have large item pickups and green waste pickups as well, so an issue that has arisen in that community, and I've taken that up on their behalf and would like to put on record here today. I certainly hope there's flexibility within the program, the kerbside collection program that—those issues I've raised in terms of providing a larger service than currently is for those residents. They don't really have any other opportunity to get large items of rubbish or large items of green waste themselves—sorry, what's that Councillor BOURKE? Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Don't be distracted Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Right, okay, yes—no other way of getting them off the island, Madam Chair. So I'm not criticising. I'm just saying the residents have identified that this is a bit of an issue. The bins arrive on an afternoon, by that night they are all full and overflowing, and a lot of residents who come and go from the island who may not be there on the same day that those bins arrive, miss the opportunity to get their large items into those bins. So I just think if we can, if there's flexibility, it would certainly be much appreciated by the residents and property owners at Kooringal to see if we can be a little bit more flexible in terms of that program. While we're on waste, Madam Chair, I did note in the—on page 196 of the budget under Waste and Resource Recovery Services, the Income Statement, there is a large jump in external revenue, and Councillor MATIC explained in the Information Sessions that, that was mostly due to increases in rates and gate fees. So a $7.5 million increase, but when you look at the—in terms of the surplus that this area will be running this year, that jumps by $4 million to $18 million. So while we have—we know and we hear in the media more and more the way in which families and workers out there are struggling, cost of living is rising all over the place, we have—sorry, what was that Councillor BOURKE? Councillor interjecting. Councillor CASSIDY: Yes, registration of cars is going up, that's exactly right, rates are going up well above inflation. Things are rising and I accept that absolutely. I accept that. Wages are flatlining. Wages are flatlining. We've got the Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA)—not exactly a hot bed of industrial activism, the RBA is saying that this is becoming such a crisis that workers need to demand more. But what we have here is an enormous—penalty rates are being cut—is an enormous increase in not only revenue, but an enormous increase in a surplus that this area is making by charging more and more for our residents to use these services. So it's not as if we're asking them to cover the increased costs here we're seeing. They're covering an increased surplus for this area, Madam Chair, and when we're seeing fees and charges right across this organisation going up this year, it certainly seems like a bit of unnecessary hip pocket pain to be saying to people in this area—where we're saying to them come and use our waste facilities and contribute to an $18 million profit for this area. It seems a little strange in terms of priorities. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor McLACHLAN.

Councillor McLACHLAN: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Just as the bells chime the afternoon, who would have thought we'd extend this session in debate about Program 3, right through a morning, and into the afternoon, having started yesterday afternoon, but there we go. As Councillor GRIFFITHS said yesterday in the first Opposition response on this program, that this is the program that all residents love. So I do expect that everyone here today will vote for it, will support it, because it is true that this is the program that delivers for the residents of Brisbane. It is the program that people love because they know it is about keeping our city clean, green and sustainable. That's what this program is about, but I will go to some of the issues that have been raised by Councillors during the course of the debate on this program. I actually wanted to start with a grudging recognition of Councillor SRI who, whilst he proffered some ideas which I wouldn't agree with, at least he proffered some policy ideas, which stands in stark contrast to the Opposition or the formal Opposition—the party of five over there. Actually, party of five—the theme yesterday was about showbiz wasn't it Councillor MURPHY? Party of Five that was an American drama program. I think in the hands of these folk over here it's really a sitcom. Councillors interjecting. Councillor McLACHLAN: I'll move on, but the Party of Five—the older brother trying to keep the unruly siblings under control. I do see similarity to that old drama, but as I say out here it really plays as a sitcom. Madam Chairman, where do I start in terms of some of the things that have been raised? Well look, I'll start with trees. There was a fair discussion about managing trees on public land, and there were claims of reductions in budget, which clearly those Councillors don't read the budget book for all that well we know. That's from past history, and certainly in relation to this particular budget book as well, because what they always do and have done in this case, they look at some specific projects and say ‘budget down, the cutting budget—cutting the budget’. Well look, what they overlook always is looking at the core budget that's been provided and managing trees on public land and I'll quote the figures. The budget in 2016-17 original budget of $13,758,000, in 2017-18, that jumps to $16,027,000. So, a five per cent increase in the amount of money being spent on managing trees on public land. Through our contractors and our Field Services group who provide those services with this money, they will undertake numerous maintenance tasks on trees, but there's an expectation of also a numerous number of trees to be planted. So, 9,000 trees will be planted as part of the service in 2017-18. So Councillor SRI and his friends to claim that there's a decimation of trees in public spaces, I think, as sometimes through the narrow prism of West End perhaps, but if they look more broadly to the whole city, they can see, as Councillor RICHARDS said, that we have a great clean, green city with a vast urban forest. I guess it's disappointing to listen to Councillor SRI to recognise that he still hasn't picked up our clean, green, sustainable report card and vision through to 2031, to talk and read about what we're actually saying about the urban forests and protection of the urban forest in this city, because if he did he'd learn a hell of a lot about what we are doing to do the things he says we're not doing. That is planting trees, with a view to keeping the city cooler, along shade ways and boulevards in particular, so that they can assist us in managing the heat islands that do occur within all cities and in this city as well. So I recommend it's a good read Councillor SRI. Pick it up, have a read and understand what we're actually talking about and actually undertaking.

Madam Chairman, there was a fair bit too about drainage and flooding. Let me say this—again through the narrow prism looking at a couple of projects—there are conclusions drawn about the allocation of money for drainage. Well look, overall there's a budget this year for $94 million for drainage and maintenance. That goes across drainage design, drainage construction, the Residential Flood Assistance Program—I'll come back to that in a bit more detail in a minute—the stormwater infrastructure, the maintenance of enclosed drains, the maintenance and rehabilitation of open drains, the major waterway vegetation management, the stormwater drainage rehabilitation, the core budget for managing and maintaining assets, and citywide gully reconstruction, which is something that we all see in every ward across the city. So if you look at the money that is allocated in this program for drainage issues for dealing with the effects of rainfall, of water coming up from our creeks, of water coming potentially up in high tides—$94 million. That's a significant budget and it addresses issues across the whole city. To those claims that there's an unfair allocation of money between one side of the city and the other, that's simply wrong. If you look back at the history of the provision of services under this program going back 10 years, you will see there's been a big investment in both sides of the city, and in particular after the 2011 flood, on the southside of the city. So that does include the backflow valves that were installed to provide maximum support for those areas that were flooded in 2011. There's been, as Councillor BOURKE said, a thorough investigation about the value of continuing with some backflow valves in terms of the return we get from protecting people from flooding. It's disingenuous for some Councillors, as they have, to go on radio and claim that in the 2011 flood, 5,000 homes would have been prevented from being flooded in 2011 if there'd been backflow valves installed before the 2011 flood, and that's simply not true. That's simply not true. The backflow valves that have been installed do provide some support for residents in some streets, but to claim—as was claimed on radio, has been claimed in a Change.org petition—that the installation of further backflow valves would have stopped flooding of all those households in the 2011 flood, is just plain wrong. That campaign is disingenuous and leading residents down on a path, as Councillor BOURKE said, to suggest that there are silver bullet solutions for these issues, and there simply aren't. There was further discussion from Councillor STRUNK. Councillor STRUNK was the first contributor to the debate this morning and again Councillor STRUNK, I do encourage you to go and have a good look at what happens with the budget. There are transfers of money from projects into core operating—money provided to our officers. That happens consistently, continually, as programs that are started as projects become the core provision of services. You can criticise what you think is a reduction in a budget line for a project and saying that's a cut in the budget. In fact, what you're ignoring is looking at what's being provided in the core budget. You need to look at those in conjunction and look at what money is being provided for the whole program. Madam Chairman, what else can I say that people have talked to? So waste services—I was hugely disappointed in Councillor CUMMING's contribution to the whole debate to be frank. He was allocated 45 minutes to respond to the LORD MAYOR. Spoke for 25 minutes, 15 minutes perhaps to come up with some ideas. He sat down at the 25-minute mark, so they'll spend 25 minutes criticising the LORD MAYOR and the budget, sat down, no ideas came forward from him. There was a bit of a suggestion just now when he got up to speak. Again, going back to an old theme of his, that we should ride over the top of private providers of waste services for commercial businesses, and take away their business from them by establishing a monopoly of services for the provision of waste services, including recycling.

Well Councillor CUMMING, to your suggestion in that regard, that's not the way we operate. We don't suggest that we should have a monopoly for the provision of all waste services in this city, and there is space in the way that services are provided to allow other contractors other than those contracted to Council for the provision of household waste services to pick-up services. What else did we hear? Oh in relation to Councillor CASSIDY— Councillor interjecting. Councillor McLACHLAN: Oh poor spelling. That was the core—Councillor CUMMING just reminds me that he's key contribution in this debate was spelling out a couple of spelling mistakes. Well we'll certainly get onto those officers who clearly live under that misapprehension about the spelling of Elanora with an ‘E’ instead of an ‘A’. What a great sin that is for that to be on their books as the spelling for those parks. We'll make sure—we'll track those officers down and make sure that they're taken— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor McLACHLAN: —taken to account for their dreadful misspelling. Madam Chairman, I see my time has elapsed. I'd like to conclude by thanking everybody for their contribution to the debate on this program. I recommend it to the Chamber. I'd like to thank all the officers who have contributed to its execution, that is the Field Services officers. Chairman: Councillor McLACHLAN your time has expired unfortunately.

Motion put: The Chairman submitted to the Chamber the motion for the adoption of the Clean, Green and Sustainable City Program and it was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillor Andrew WINES, and Councillor Matthew BOURKE immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.

AYES: 25 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES, Norm WYNDHAM, and the Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Charles STRUNK, Shayne SUTTON, and Nicole JOHNSTON.

The Chairman then called upon Councillor Julian SIMMONDS to present the Future Brisbane Program.

4. FUTURE BRISBANE PROGRAM: 660/2016-17 Councillor Julian SIMMONDS, Chairman of the City Planning Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Vicki HOWARD, that for the services of the Council, the allocations for the Operations and the Projects for the year 2017-18 and the Rolling Projects for the Future Brisbane Program as contained on pages 73 to 83 so far as they relate to Program 4, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS.

Councillor SIMMONDS: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and I obviously rise to strongly support Program 4 – Future Brisbane, as part of the LORD MAYOR's 2017-18 Budget. Years of experience have told me that I am going to run out of time, so I would like to at the very outset thank a few people. Of course first of all LORD MAYOR Graham QUIRK and Councillor ADAMS, who have worked hard to put this budget together to ensure that the future planning of our city is well catered for in the 2017-18 year, but importantly to the Council officers who this program funds who work behind the scenes and have done so for the last financial year. We put a lot of demands on them but they've risen to the challenge very well, and I know that they will continue that hard work as part of the funding provided in the 2017-18 Budget. So thank them very much, and a very quick thank you also to the staff in my offices as well—to Gemma and Matt and to Kirsti for their help in our overview of this program. In terms of the Future Brisbane budget for 2017-18, well there's a lot to look forward to for our city. This program is all about ensuring that the growth and development of Brisbane continues, continues in a very positive manner and ensures that we have the lifestyle and amenities—the high level of lifestyle and amenities that we want for our city and our residents. It is an exciting time for our city in the planning space. We've got a lead up to a number of large projects, Queen's Wharf, the second runway at Brisbane Airport, the Brisbane Metro, the Howard Smith Wharves redevelopment, Edward Street and a new program of river activation. Together these are going to combine over the next few years. I have no doubt they'll create a real step change for Brisbane, and Brisbane residents will see their city grow and evolve in a very positive way. So if we are going to do that in a considered, careful and appropriate way, we need to have a well-funded program to ensure for the future planning of our city. That is what we have before us and I would encourage all Councillors to support it. Let's start on a few specific programs I would like to make some comments on. Firstly, the new allocation of funding in celebration of the 30th anniversary, for the Brisbane Expo 88. On Tuesday LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK, unveiled the recasting and installation of two old Expo artworks that are now located in King George Square, and have been added to our existing art trail that celebrates Expo 88. Councillors will see the extra $555,000 put into this budget so we can continue to expand that program. There are many more pieces of artwork that are still in storage from Expo 88, particularly around those scenes, the people—the individual people and the scenes like the one of the fireplace that sits in front of the DPI (Department of Primary Industries) building, like the two that now sit in King George Square. We will have those recast and rolled out in order to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Brisbane Expo 88. We also have as part of this Program the continuation of the City of Lights funding, which has delivered some fantastic creative lighting outcomes across our city. Just to give Councillors a little bit of an idea of what will be achieved as part of the 2017-18 Budget, in 2016-17 we were able to light up the King George Square facing facade of 239 George Street. We were able to provide lighting and projection for the Toowong Cemetery Anzac Day performances. We were able to provide temporary projector lighting for a number of major festivals across our city, we did bud lighting in two large fig trees at the CBD end of the Goodwill Bridge, which just looks spectacular if you haven't already seen them, bud lighting of the large fig tree in Captain Burke Park, and 198 pendant lights suspended from 20 trees in Melbourne Street. So these are great ways to activate key boulevards, gateways and precincts of our city.

This year, in particular, something a little bit different and a little bit special, this program is now going to pivot into a grants program. So as part of the grants scheme an applicant can receive up to $75,000 for the cost of lighting, but not exceeding more than 50% of the project costs. So this is a way for Council to partner with building owners, businesses, and tenants, in order to light up key precincts of our city. There's a number of deliverables to be met, but it includes not just key lighting on buildings, but also lighting gateways and features. So if you've got large trees or gateway areas within your suburb that you think would be appropriate for this kind of lighting program, I'd really love to hear from Councillors so we can do it in a collaborative fashion. The other program that is continuing that's been very successful in the last financial year is the Brisbane Canvas program. So this is a program that has seen the delivery of some very high quality street art installations across Brisbane, setting an important standard for the type of street art that we want to see in our city. Last year the Brisbane Canvas program opened to local and emerging artists to apply for a number of sites that we put forward. As part of the Expressions of Interest program (EOI), they could submit their design and then they were chosen by a panel. The first call of expressions of interest we put up nine sites in total and we saw expressions of interest from 43 artists, submitting 69 different designs. This is a fantastic outcome for the very first year that we did this, and as part of the funding in the 2017-18 Budget we want to continue to build on that. So we will do another EOI process, we will release more sites this financial year —sites like Waterworks Road, Red Hill, Sandgate Road, Toombul, Jack Flynn Drive, Morningside, and Waldheim Street at Annerley. But again if other Councillors have large publicly-owned walls or bridge abutments, or whatever it may be, that they think would be appropriate and they'd like to see put out as part of that EOI process, please let me know. In addition, of course, artists have the ability to apply for a site that isn't specifically listed but which they have a connection to in the local community. The budget before us, Program 4, will also see the finalisation of Edward Street upgrade. Now this is a key priority project for the City Centre Master Plan. It's an $11 million investment to support this boulevard as a high end retail destination. We need to support these businesses, we need to support local jobs in our city. We know we have a wonderful opportunity in Queen's Wharf, but it also brings with it a number of extra retail spaces, that's going to put pressure on existing businesses within our CBD. I personally think we are a strong enough and a vibrant enough city to maintain a number of different high end retail areas throughout our city, but businesses and workers need our support in order to do it. So this is a project that we strongly support. In this financial year we have commenced construction on the northern side of the street, and those works are now complete. They include large stock trees, new granite paving, new footpath lighting and decorative tree lighting and new street furniture, and we have also started construction on the southern side. So the 2017-18 Budget will allow us to do those finishing touches on the northern side, and also complete work that is currently underway on the southern side of the street as well. So we look forward to the opportunity to open that up when it's all done with the traders, and we'll be working with the traders in order to activate that space once the upgrade is done. The Future Brisbane Program now also includes a new line item called Suburban Precinct Projects, which is the evolution, the existing evolution, of a number of previously existing programs including SCIPs, laneways, and food trucks. To combine these kind of activations and outcomes and deliver them in a holistic way now into key suburban precincts.

Activations like the very successful Food Trucks initiative, which we have been trialling over the last financial year, and thanks to funding provided in the 2017-18 Budget, will now transition to business as usual. We're seeing a huge interest in this particular webpage, and the program from foodies across Brisbane. The website gets more than 5,000 visits every week, and we now have more than 48 food trucks using the website. Since the launch, there have been over 1,400 bookings on the website by food trucks, activating key suburban locations and providing a great level of amenity for residents. Sorry, excuse me, Madam Chairman. The precinct program will also continue to include the Aspley SCIP, which was announced as part of last year's budget. That funding is within this new program. Already we have started background work with traders, undertaking consultation with them to prepare for construction to commence next financial year. We will also continue to investigate under this Suburban Precinct Projects the ability, as I said, to combine those activations into new suburban precincts to include new active lighting, new streetscapes, new artwork. I would encourage Councillors to get their thinking caps on and again work with me if they think there's key suburban precincts in their local ward that would benefit from this holistic suburban improvement approach. A large part of Future Brisbane Program, of course Program 4, revolves around the strategic planning of our city through the Brisbane City Plan and associated development assessment. This funding in Program 4 will continue to support our rolling program of major and minor amendments, to ensure our City Plan is on track, and responds to community and industry feedback, as well as changes that have occurred as a result of legislation. Currently we have five major amendments progressing to cover a range of topics. Some are generalised amendments, some are specific like the ones around Biodiversity mapping, Pre-1911 homes, and aged care and retirement living, and funding provided by the LORD MAYOR in this financial year will allow those amendments to progress into incorporation. Importantly, this Chamber needs to be aware and recognise that the State Government has done an awful lot of planning reform in the 2016-17 financial year. There were more than seven new key planning instruments, including a new Act, including a new regulation, including new Ministerial guidelines, which commence on 3 July. Now we have been doing a lot of work, and the team have been working incredibly hard to be ready for this transition. I know that we are ready, as much as you can be for this level of regulatory change all happening at once, but there will be an element of having to try and see how we go. We'll be maintaining two separate systems. We'll still be assessing existing development applications under the current Act, and then any new application lodged after 3 July will be assessed under the new Act, and the two systems will run simultaneously. We are also expecting, of course, the South East Queensland Regional Plan to be passed down at some point during the new 2017-18 financial year as well, and we'll be ready to respond to that. So I'd like to thank the Development Assessment (DA) team in particular for the work that they have done, and also our Strategic Planning team for the work they have done in preparing for those new Acts and regulations. I note that as part of the 2017-18 funding allocation that's been provided, there is funding for additional temporary staff within the Development Assessment team. As I said, this is important because we will be running simultaneous programs under two different Acts. We'll be learning about the new legislation as to how it's applied in practice particularly by applicants, who now have new abilities to withdraw from the information request process, who have the ability to stop the clock for up to 130 days. So we will work very judiciously to ensure that ratepayers' money is, as I said, used judiciously. We will only pick up the extra funding and the extra temporary staff if we need it, but this Chamber has my word that we are going to be very

careful that we are not going to allow expectations within the community and KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) that we have set for ourselves to slip just because of all the new planning regulation. That new allocation for staffing will allow us to ensure that if we need extra temporary resources, we can grab those and make sure that we continue to meet the community's expectations around efficient and effective assessment of development applications. We also of course have nine neighbourhood plans that are currently underway. Over the financial year Council has adopted four neighbourhood plans and undertook consultation for an additional eight neighbourhood plans, so this is a huge workload that the team have taken on. I pushed them very hard and I thank them very much for the way they have risen to that challenge. Our award-winning neighbourhood planning program, of course, as part of it we undertake three separate periods of community consultation throughout the life of developing a new neighbourhood plan. Two more than what's required under the State Government planning legislation, and now considered best practice by the State Government to the extent that they are adopting it, as part of the guideline for other Queensland councils. Now once the budget is confirmed by the Chamber, I look forward to working with Councillors and officers on new neighbourhood plans or planning consultation that will commence using funding provided this financial year. Can I also mention the Suburban Construction Management team, another group of hardworking officers who will again be funded as part of the 2017-18 Budget allocation. They've responded proactively and reactively to concerns around construction management in our city. They are now working collaboratively with the development industry, and more importantly, the construction industry as well, around educating them on their requirements, their rights and responsibilities, particularly in complying with construction management plans that seek to minimise any amenity concerns for local residents. They're also— Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS unfortunately your time has expired— Councillor SIMMONDS: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I commend this program to the Chamber. Chairman: Councillor WINES?

ADJOURNMENT: 661/2016-17 At that time, 12.29pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Steven TOOMEY, that the meeting adjourn for a period of one hour, to commence only when all Councillors had vacated the Chamber and the doors have been locked.

UPON RESUMPTION:

Chairman: Councillors, we will now continue with Program 4 – Future Brisbane. Councillor SUTTON, you have the call. Councillor SUTTON: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to add to the debate on this program, and I guess, you know, when I was looking and reviewing the program, I couldn’t help myself thinking, that Future Brisbane just seemed to be so much more than what it is today. So, I went back, and I had a look, and last week when we were debating in this place the neighbourhood planning report, I think it was, or the E&C report, Councillor SIMMONDS made a claim that the golden era for neighbourhood planning and city planning in this time was under Councillor COOPER’s stewardship. I have to say today, I think that’s true, because the Future Brisbane Program, in terms of its budget allocation, has a capital spend of $7.3 million in the current

financial year, and an expense spend of $86.3 million, and it covers 10 pages of the document book in total. I remember a former Lord Mayor would come into this place at budget time and say, ‘look how good our budget is, it’s so many pages long. It’s over 300 pages’. He really held true to the fact that the more pages the budget was, the better that budget document was. It was really a true test of how good the budget was, was how many pages. I thought to myself last night after doing a little bit of checking, that the Future Brisbane Program makes up 10 pages of the document—a whole four pages less than when it first appeared in the 2005-06 Budget document. I just kind of thought, well, that’s probably not a robust debate point. So then I started looking at capital spend, Madam Chair, and I started looking at, you know, the amount of officers we have doing work on this program, and I found that since the 2011-12 financial year, or the last Campbell Newman budget in this place, where City Planning was headed by Councillor COOPER, the capital budget for City Planning was $40.98 million, and we had—the expenses were $86.5 million. So since then, in 2012-13, capital spend went down to $26 million; 2015-16 down to $15 million; 2016-17 down to $13.6 million; and then we have today where we’re down to just $7.3 million in terms of deliverables for the City of Brisbane. Councillor interjecting. Councillor SUTTON: You’re right, Councillor CASSIDY, it’s almost a book title —‘Councillor SIMMONDS and the Mysterious Shrinking Portfolio’, Madam Chair, because it’s clear he’s not doing much as Chairperson for City Planning. Because, if you look at it—let’s look at Suburban Precinct Projects. I remember the days when Councillor COOPER used to have two or three SCIPs going on at any one time, and we were having to coordinate the opening dates and the construction schedules and, you know, to be fair, we bashed her up sometimes when the construction took a little bit longer, but it’s better than doing no construction at all, Madam Chair, which is what Councillor SIMMONDS will be doing this financial year—not one new SCIP is going to be rolled out to the people of Brisbane through the Future Brisbane portfolio. Madam Chair, why does Councillor SIMMONDS hate SCIPs? Why does he hate SCIPs so much, Madam Chair? I don’t understand. But then we turn to neighbourhood planning, Madam Chair, and Councillor SIMMONDS says there’s no new neighbourhood plans being rolled out. Well, Madam Chair— Councillor SIMMONDS: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SIMMONDS. Councillor SIMMONDS: Claim to be outrageously misrepresented. Chairman: Thank you. Councillor SUTTON: Well, Madam Chair, the fact of the matter is, when I asked him which new neighbourhood plans would be commencing this current financial year, he didn’t know, Madam Chair. So, there’s either an acute lack of leadership going on in that portfolio— Councillors interjecting. Councillor SUTTON: —or Councillor SIMMONDS hates neighbourhood plans, just like the rest of Brisbane, Madam Chair. So, why do you hate neighbourhood plans so much, Councillor SIMMONDS? I don’t understand. Madam Chair, when we’re on to neighbourhood plans, I guess the stats that struck me most significantly in the Budget Information Session, when Councillor SIMMONDS was doing his presentation on the budget highlights from last year, but as we go forward into this financial year, we need to keep this in mind—just the absolute lack of meaningful two-way engagement with communities on neighbourhood plans.

I actually wrote down the stats he used in his presentation. He was very proud of them. He talked about the 90,000 page views for neighbourhood planning, and he talked about the 42,000 newsletters for neighbourhood planning. These are one-way communication, Madam Chair, one-way. Council information to residents of Brisbane. But then, Madam Chair, he talked about the 10—the 10 Community Planning Team (CPT) meetings that were held. This was the only actual mechanism where communities could come together to discuss and talk to Council about what they wanted to see in the neighbourhood plans that Council was progressing. Now, Talk to a Planner sessions, they’re a bit different. They’re if people want to come and talk about individual site specific kind of issues. They’re not about the development of neighbourhood plans. Madam Chair, that’s appalling. That’s actually, you know—we know that this Council doesn’t actually really listen to Community Planning Teams, and then puts words into their mouths, because it gags the members of the Community Planning Team and then goes out and tells local communities that the plans that are at complete and utter odds at what their community actually wants, are actually in fact what the Community Planning Team told them that they wanted. But those statistics, I think, speak volumes, because this Council is focused on one-way communication when it comes to planning in this city, and they are not interested in a two-way discussion with communities from the grass roots up in terms of planning for the future of their communities. Which again highlights just how far this program has come from the original principles it encapsulated when the LNP were first elected in this place and talked about neighbourhood plans as a way to stop community anger about planning outcomes, because they would have an active voice in those planning outcomes. We are so far away from that, that we believe on this side of the fence that we need to—except for Councillor HOWARD, there almost needs to be a rider, doesn’t there—that we believe that we need to go back to the drawing board and back to first base when it comes to neighbourhood planning. But, Madam Chair, in terms of the deliverables for the Suburban Precinct Projects, as I said, there’s no new SCIPs. There’s no decision yet on SCIPs to be rehabilitated—again, either an appalling lack of leadership, an appalling lack of decision making, or the fact that we’re more interested in doing other stuff than we are about taking care of assets that we once took pride in upgrading. The other thing is, Madam Chair, the Edward Street upgrade. We talked about in the Budget Information Sessions, which now comes under the Suburban Precincts Project, the disability bays that were once on Edward Street, near the top of the Queen Street Mall. They have been permanently removed, Madam Chair. They will not be going back into that location at the completion of the Edward Street upgrade. So clearly, in Councillor SIMMONDS’ mind, people with disabilities don’t buy Louis Vuitton because— Councillors interjecting. Councillor SUTTON: Well, well, you know, if you plan for an upgrade like this, you need to make sure that everyone is accommodated, and ripping— Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS! Councillor SUTTON: No, they’re not going back. Madam Chair, the location of those disability bays were right at the top of the mall, allowing for easy access into the mall and everything it has to happen. Councillor SIMMONDS, if you get up to respond, tell me exactly how far away those spaces are going from the mall as a consequence of this project, because they are significantly further—they are significantly further than they originally were. Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, unfortunately your time has expired. Further debate?

Councillor HOWARD. Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Madam Chairman— Chairman: Sorry, sorry, apologies, Councillor SIMMONDS, misrepresentation. Councillor SIMMONDS: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. It was regarding neighbourhood plans. That was not the answer that I gave. The answer that I gave was that once the funding is approved by this Chamber, then discussions about appropriate forward planning mechanisms can commence. Chairman: Councillor HOWARD. Councillor HOWARD: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak in support of Budget 2017-18 initiatives that relate to Program 4 – Future Brisbane, a program that is critical to the future of our city. The success of Brisbane today hasn’t come about by chance. It has taken significant vision, planning, investment and community understanding to get to where we are today, and I am proud that this budget reinforces this Administration’s vision and strong plan to ensure Brisbane remains the best it can be. Madam Chairman, today I would like to speak about initiatives that are included in Program 4 which greatly benefit my ward of Central, with the first being Strategy 4.2.1, which relates to local identity and claims to facilitate economic prosperity, protect local character, provide vibrant public places and set standards for new development and facilitate the delivery of infrastructure. Madam Chairman, I am pleased that this budget continues to support Council’s award-winning neighbourhood planning process, which actively includes communities in planning for the area and the wider city through extensive community engagement. Now, I listened very carefully to Councillor SUTTON just then, and I don’t know what she does when there’s neighbourhood plans, and I know that she’s an excellent Councillor, but I use every possibility I have to use the tool of neighbourhood planning to talk to my constituents. I also know that I raise these issues at P&C meetings, at Lions meetings, at Rotary meetings, at Chamber of Commerce meetings, and I’m often told about things that people are interested in, and I encourage them then to put in their submissions. Now, these things that the budget provides us are in fact tools, and they’re tools that we as Councillors need to use diligently. I for one think that it’s an excellent process. I have currently two neighbourhood plans that are being finalised—one in Spring Hill and one at Newstead North. The communities there have welcomed the opportunity to have their say on how each area evolves. A key aspect of Council’s vision has been for the urban renewal of Spring Hill, balanced with preservation of the suburb’s rich history, and this has been supported by this community. Madam Chairman, the Spring Hill neighbourhood plan preserves the much-loved history of Spring Hill, and will unlock the economic potential of this wonderful inner city location. In Newstead North, the neighbourhood plan focuses on the area between Waterloo Street and Breakfast Creek, as well as Bowen Hills, outside the State Government’s development area. As we are all aware, Newstead North is a northern gateway to the inner city, and a valuable inner city industrial and creative hub, which would be greatly enhanced under the draft plan. Existing creative industries such as art, design and low impact manufacturing will be encouraged, along with shops, cafes and offices in mixed use developments, alongside apartments. The northern part of Breakfast Creek Road between Edmund Street and Breakfast Creek will become the main area for future growth, as well as the small redevelopment area in Maud and Austin Streets, both of which will be limited to a maximum building height of eight storeys. Madam Chairman, both neighbourhood plans recently finished their public notification and are scheduled for adoption by Council later this year. I would also like to briefly touch upon Service 4.2.3.2, Creative Brisbane. It is without a doubt that Central Ward is the cultural thriving heart of Brisbane. It’s

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 217 where our city comes to work, rest and play, and I know everybody moans when I say that, but it is a true statement. I’m just saying the facts. I’m thrilled that this budget reinforces Council’s commitment to keep it that way. Madam Chairman, a wonderful initiative of the budget is to continue funding for the extremely popular City of Lights program. City of Lights, which was born out of Brisbane’s hosting of the G20, and has allowed for some of Brisbane’s most iconic assets to be lit up at night, creating a wonderful visual treat for both residents and tourists. The initiative has also allowed us to use our most prominent assets to support many wonderful community and not-for-profit groups by lighting up our bridges and buildings in their colours. Madam Chairman, this year the City of Lights program will be extended even further, following the purchase of two lighting projectors, which will be made available to community organisations across our city and, in just under a few weeks, we will see the historic London Woolstore at Teneriffe lit up as part of the iconic and much-loved Teneriffe festival. Madam Chairman, the community is really looking forward to seeing this wonderful projection, and I can confirm that Council has also been approached by residents of Freshwater Apartments in Teneriffe, who are keen to create further visual masterpieces for the community and city to enjoy by enhancing their buildings and its surrounds. While I’m talking about projects that are visual masterpieces for the community and the city to enjoy, I’d like to touch on Service 4.2.2.1, Urban Futures Brisbane (UFB), and particularly to talk to the continued Edward Street upgrades and their capital outlay of $1.8 million to finalise the project. Madam Chairman, we have been talking about, and now we’re in the process of delivering, our vision for Edward Street. We are transforming the strip into a world-class retail environment, with broad footpaths, tree-lined pavements and all the associated infrastructure upgrades to stormwater. Now, Madam Chairman, I think it’s around 30,000 people who use this busy footpath intersection every day. That’s 30,000 people every day. Postcode 4000, with Brisbane City alone, excluding Spring Hill, has around 6,000 residential apartments, and these residents have just as much right to streetscape and footpath upgrades as any other postcode. That’s why I thought it a great shame that those sitting behind me, and their team in 2015, seemingly took the position that this footpath and streetscape project in the city should not occur. Well, I will remind the Chamber, Madam Chairman, that city residents do want these upgrades to happen. So many of these residents rely on a job in retail in the city, and use these footpaths every day. Again, Madam Chairman, the opportunity is there today for the Opposition to fully come on board with our Edward Street vision. Will they take the opportunity today to support the traders and the residents of the city as we create more jobs in construction and retail, and a more vibrant Edward Street? Only time will tell. Madam Chairman, I know that there is a great amount of building happening at the moment across the city, and it gives me pleasure to talk to the work of the Suburban Construction Management Taskforce (SCMT) in Service 4.3.1.1. The building industry is very healthy at present, and continuing to employ thousands of Brisbane builders, carpenters, electricians, all across the city. Many thousands of workers rely on employment in this industry to support their families, so I know just how important productivity, the pursuit of high level of employment, and safety is in the building and construction industry, ideals that initiatives like our Suburban Construction Management Taskforce take to deliver. We all know that building can bring an amount of pressure for residents living close to a building site, and that’s why we established the SCMT with the directive to investigate the points that I’ve just raised. I know that the new dedicated officers in the Compliance Branch have been working hard with their DA counterparts to identify risks associated with developments, and engage with builders and residents to mitigate these risks in Central Ward. I thank them for their work in Central Ward because, as I expect to see the continued strong

uplift in projected population, I am sure there will be continuing pressures for residents in our part of the city. In conclusion, Madam Chairman, can I just thank my colleague, Councillor SIMMONDS, for his leadership of City Planning, and the wonderful Council officers who work tirelessly to make our city even better. As the proud Councillor for the capital of Australia’s New World City, and as the Deputy Chair for City Planning, I am proud that this budget continues Council’s determination to shape a city of which we can all be proud. I commend the program to the Chamber. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor JOHNSTON. Councillor JOHNSTON: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak on Program 4 – Future Brisbane. I listened with interest to Councillor HOWARD, and also Councillor SUTTON and Councillor SIMMONDS, and I have to say that the two LNP Councillors appear to be a little bit deluded about the effectiveness of community consultation when it comes to neighbourhood planning. Having had two in my area, neither of which I support, I do everything in my power to talk to residents about neighbourhood plans—direct mail, public meetings of my own—all those sorts of things. The problem, however, as both of them don’t seem to understand, is that this Council is not listening to its feedback about what communities want to see in their plan. Now, in my area, in the Fairfield-Dutton Park plan, that was very clear. In the Sherwood-Graceville neighbourhood plan, that was also very clear. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, this is about the funding for the neighbourhood plans and the development assessment—the Future Brisbane Program going forward in the new financial year. It is not an opportunity for you to get up and re-hash everything about all of the neighbourhood plans that have taken place in your ward. Councillor JOHNSTON: So, just to be clear, when Councillor HOWARD mentions Spring Hill, Newstead— Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, why do you have to— Councillor JOHNSTON: I can’t mention a current plan— Chairman: —be so argumentative all of the time? Councillor JOHNSTON: I’m just clarifying your ruling where you’ve let one Councillor just speak about specific plans— Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON! Stop answering back! Councillor JOHNSTON: Stop saying things that make no sense. Chairman: Right, Councillor JOHNSTON, you do not tell me to stop doing anything. I have just about had enough of your belligerence in this place. It is absolutely disgraceful. Every other Councillor here is able to behave with a level of decorum, except for you. Councillor JOHNSTON: You interrupted me. Chairman: No, Councillor JOHNSTON— Councillor JOHNSTON: You let her speak about neighbourhood plans, specific plans— Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON! Councillor JOHNSTON: —currently under way— Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON! Councillor JOHNSTON: —which is what I was doing—

Chairman: That is enough! I have heard enough of your insolence. Every other Councillor in this place has been respectful towards each other. You go beyond it. You seriously do. You have to have a very serious think about your behaviour in this place, and your behaviour as a public figure, because it is deplorable. Councillor JOHNSTON: Oh, excuse me. You need to stop right now, because I’ve done nothing wrong other than— DEPUTY MAYOR: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Councillor JOHNSTON: —speak in this place. Chairman: Point of order, DEPUTY MAYOR. Councillor JOHNSTON: Your comments are outrageous. I demand that they be withdrawn. I demand that they be withdrawn.

Motion for suspension of Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON: 662/2016-17 The DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER moved, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES, that Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON be suspended from the service of Council for a period of eight days.

Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion was declared carried on the voices.

Councillor SUTTON: Madam Chair, I called for a Division. Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, I was already speaking when you rose. Councillor JOHNSTON: Well, I’m not leaving. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON— Councillor JOHNSTON: I am not leaving. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, you do not direct me to do anything in this Chamber. You have been suspended from the service of the Council for eight days. Councillor JOHNSTON: I’m not leaving. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON— Councillor JOHNSTON: You’ve heard me— Chairman: —under the Meetings Local Law, I have given you a direction to leave— Councillor JOHNSTON: Your abuse and vilification has been outrageous today, and I am not leaving. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, you do not accuse me of abuse and vilification. Councillor JOHNSTON: That’s exactly what you’ve done. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, I am not going to engage in anything more. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON! Councillor JOHNSTON: You let them do it. You let them do it. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, you have been lawfully directed— Councillor interjecting. Chairman: —by myself as Chairman of this Council— Councillor interjecting. Chairman: —to leave this meeting place, and you have failed to comply repeatedly— Councillor JOHNSTON: I am not leaving. Chairman: —with that direction.

Councillor JOHNSTON: I am not leaving. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, this is your final warning. You have been directed— Councillor interjecting. Chairman: You have been directed to leave this place, this Council Chamber, as you are suspended. Councillor JOHNSTON: I am not leaving. Chairman: Councillor— Councillor JOHNSTON: You allowed Councillor HOWARD to— Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON— Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON, you have refused to obey my direction to leave this meeting place. I ask all Councillors please to vacate the Chamber. We are now on adjournment whilst I call on the Council representative to remove Councillor JOHNSTON from the Chamber.

Councillor interjecting.

Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON refused to leave the Chamber in accordance with the order made by the Chairman under section 186A(2)(b) of the City of Brisbane Act 2010. The Chairman of Council made an order under section 186A(2)(c) of the Act that Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON be removed from the meeting place. Therefore, the Divisional Manager, City Administration and Governance (an authorised person by the Chairman under section 21(8) and section 22(5) of the Meetings Local Law 2001), directed Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON to leave the Chamber. Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON continued to debate the Divisional Manager and refused to leave the Chamber. Following Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON’s failure to follow the Divisional Manager’s direction, the Queensland Police Service (QPS) was called. QPS officers were asked to escort Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON from the Chamber. Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON discussed the matter with QPS officers before leaving the Chamber with those QPS officers at their request.

UPON RESUMPTION:

Chairman: Further speakers on Program 4 – Future Brisbane? Councillor CUMMING. Sorry, you’re not rising? Not ready to speak. Other speakers? Councillor WINES. Councillor WINES: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to speak in support of Program 4 – Future Brisbane. I rise to talk about the public art program principally, and part of the budget has already been put in place. The Expo pieces that are in King George Square—the two, the one near the Officeworks, and the other one near the awning, are part of the 30th anniversary celebrations that will be flowing out across the city for the 30th anniversary of Expo, which is of course next year. The start of Expo would be next March, and it would have run for six months. So the conclusion of Expo celebrations will likely be in the October of next year. So they are on display at the moment, and part of a large scale roll out of those artworks. There’s a number that are already on display, but they’re part of the John Underwood series called The Human Factor, and those two are but a part of a whole range to be released, and part of a series that have been rolling out across our city for a long time. People like to talk about places like Melbourne having a wonderful public art program, but the truth of the matter is that it’s all spin, and that our city is a far more interesting and genuine cultural hub than that southern cold and bleak city.

The problem is that people have trouble buying into a sunny and friendly place like Brisbane, being an arts and cultural Mecca. But it is, and these are just going to add more and more to that. I also wanted to make comment about—the presentations made an interesting point about the public art work available on blank walls that can be rolled out to wards, which I will foreshadow with Councillor SIMMONDS that I will be getting into contact with him about those, because they are a fantastic idea, I think, and a really good way to battle graffiti. We know that we’ll be able to discuss that explicitly in later programs. But also I just wanted to—I noted from his presentation that there were two ideas I thought were really good. It was called Brisbane Canvas, tracking blank walls and putting public art through them, and another one called City of Lights. So, I don’t know if I’m giving away too much, but in the program, there was advised that the City of Lights grants were available for people who wanted to put lights in trees or light up other public places. So, part of the beautification process of the city lies within this program, and I think it’s been excellent. I can say from personal experience that the Alderley SCIP has transformed that shopping precinct, and it looks great, and people are referring to it in a new and interested way, which is really good, with new businesses moving in and a new attitude to the place, which was always the objective. I think it’s been a fantastic example of what we as a city try to do through public art and rejuvenation projects. So I’m looking forward to the roll out of these ideas through Brisbane Canvas, through City of Lights, and through the SCIP program, to see ways that we can make our city even more interesting and engaging, and draw people back to our suburban centres. That’s one last point I’ll make before I sit down. These artworks aren’t just for the city—they’re for centres and locations all across the city, and Enoggera Ward has benefited a great deal from public art over the years, to protect from graffiti and to make the place look nice. It’s been fantastic. So, congratulations to the artists and the work, and also to the Future Brisbane Program. I commend it strongly to the Chamber. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair, I rise to speak on Future Brisbane Program. I’m conscious of time, so I’ll try to limit my comments to the most relevant and urgent matters. I’d like to just first point out the comparatively low allocation of funding towards the Suburban Construction Management Taskforce. Councillor SIMMONDS is right when he says that those officers are very hard working, and they do great work. But the volume of construction projects, the number of high impact, large, particularly residential apartment, but also commercial construction projects happening in the city at the moment is such that that handful of officers doesn’t possibly have the capacity to investigate all the complaints that come through their team. I know they have the ability to also refer concerns to other departments, but you’ve set up the Suburban Construction Management Team as essentially the go-to contact point both for Councillors and residents, about a range of issues related to construction projects, but you haven’t provided enough funding or enough staff members within that team for them to do their job properly. I stress that I think they’re doing a great job, and I’ve had positive experiences with them, but I’ve also had situations where they haven’t had enough staffing capacity to investigate complaints which I considered legitimate and needing to be addressed. So my approach with that team has not to be to forward every single complaint I receive from residents to them. I often try and handle residents’ complaints myself, and to de-escalate concerns that I don’t think are particularly serious or as urgent.

But when there are legitimate and serious concerns raised by residents, we need the SCMT to be able to effectively investigate those within a reasonable timeframe, and I’m concerned that that’s not happening at the moment, and that’s in large part because the budget allocation for that particular item is too low. I also really want to briefly mention the Heritage Incentive Scheme. My understanding—and hopefully Councillor SIMMONDS can clarify this a little bit more—is that the Heritage Incentive Scheme is financial and advisory support towards residents to maintain heritage buildings. Is that kind of correct? I think I’m on the right track there. The concern I have is that that’s not really enough to encourage residents to maintain heritage properties, and as a result, because owners can’t afford the financial burden of maintaining these heritage properties, they let them fall into disrepair or they deliberately seek to work around the rules to avoid their obligations of heritage maintenance. So we’re setting up a fairly high standard, which is important, of maintaining and preserving heritage in our city, but the consequence of that is to place a significant financial burden on some property owners, and maybe Council should explore increasing that Heritage Incentive Scheme budget allocation, because I’m not sure it’s sufficient at the moment. I’d also like to draw attention to the very low allocation for neighbourhood planning. I share concerns raised by other Councillors in this place. I noted Councillor SUTTON’s observations earlier about the lack of two-way communication around the neighbourhood planning system. I was also mindful of Councillor HOWARD’s comments where she said that, yes, as a local Councillor, there are many opportunities for me to communicate to residents what’s going on with these neighbourhood plans and to seek feedback, and I acknowledge that. I think all Councillors in this place spend a lot of time talking to their residents when there are neighbourhood plans afoot in their neighbourhood. But genuine, meaningful community consultation takes a lot of time and resources to do well and to do properly. We now have very large electorates in terms of population. Sometimes we have multiple neighbourhood plans going on within the same electorate at the same time, and we still only have one Councillor and two ward staff for each of those electorates. My concern is that good neighbourhood planning discussions and feedback is not something to be tacked on to the end of a P&C meeting or a Rotary Club meeting. Those sorts of discussions and feedback mechanisms should happen in parallel, but we also need better resourced, formal and established processes to inform the drafting of neighbourhood plans. I don’t see how that’s possible with such low funding allocations towards this budget item. I have been really frustrated by the lack of appropriate resourcing for community planning sessions within the Dutton Park-Fairfield neighbourhood plan, and I note that there have been similar concerns in the past with the South Brisbane Riverside neighbourhood plan. I think it’s troubling that, in such a rapidly growing city, with so much emphasis placed on how important and valuable the neighbourhood planning process is, that we’re not adequately resourcing it. So I deeply question the low funding allocation for the neighbourhood planning item. I again reiterate my broader concerns that neighbourhood planning in this city is not transparent, democratic or accountable. Thank you. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor TOOMEY. Councillor TOOMEY: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to also speak on Program 4 – Future Brisbane.

Madam Chairman, Program 4 drives the look and feel of our city, which can be argued draws and retains people to the city, its subtropical nature, its aspirations and expectations that enable change and response to the demands of the modern city that we are. This program enables me and other Councillors to take our residents on a neighbourhood planning journey, to build our communities’ understanding and the ownership of planning our communities. As the Chamber is aware, The Gap Ward is undertaking two neighbourhood plans in parallel—one is a commitment by the LORD MAYOR to the residents of The Gap in last year’s budget, and continues this year. The other under the direction of the Deputy Premier, following an election commitment by the member for Ashgrove. I’m very happy to advise the program for The Gap neighbourhood plan will continue with a high level of public engagement that has occurred so far. In the coming months, residents of The Gap will have a draft strategy for their neighbourhood plan to comment on, and further consultation will occur with the neighbourhood planning team and at my own community corners. I thank all the officers for their high level of service they have provided so far to the residents of The Gap, and I’m sure the high level of service will continue through the provisions of this program to deliver a neighbourhood plan The Gap can be proud of. The Ferny Grove-Upper Kedron neighbourhood plan has been undertaken as the Deputy Premier instructed, and I’m pleased to say the level of engagement with the community has been very high, both with the neighbourhood planning team, and myself at community corners in areas that cover Upper Kedron, Ferny Grove, Keperra and The Gap. Through this program the community has highlighted many shortcomings in the area the State Government needs to address. Simple things such as TransLink’s contract service area to include new areas of Upper Kedron, or increasing parking at the Ferny Grove Railway Station to accommodate the increasing growth and demand from Moreton Shire. Education doesn’t miss out either, Madam Chairman. The school catchment zones need to be reviewed to reduce the disruption that it’s causing the community. Residents and students are left in a pickle around the current catchment arrangements at Ferny Grove and The Gap High. Local school infrastructure has been forgotten by the local member for Ferny Grove and the Minister for Education. I recently joined the Principal of Ferny Grove High School and its residents in a petition calling on the State Government to upgrade the school so the cohort can assemble under the one roof. I’m not going to mention the railway level crossing—actually, I’m going to, anyway. Two railway level crossings in Ferny Grove with the boom gates down half the time—half an hour out of every hour at peak times. That’s not— Chairman: Councillor TOOMEY, this is about Future Brisbane. That’s probably more Infrastructure. Unless you can direct me to a particular program that it’s relating to. Councillor TOOMEY: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I’ll go back, yes. The draft neighbourhood plan for Ferny Grove is currently out for comment. The ecological plan is of great concern with many of my residents. They identify with the interlace of the natural environment as one of the main reasons they live in Upper Kedron. An ecological plan restricts the future— Councillor SUTTON: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SUTTON. Councillor SUTTON: No disrespect to Councillor TOOMEY, but Councillor JOHNSTON has just been expelled for speaking about a neighbourhood plan, and specifically mentioning her neighbourhood plan. I guess my point of— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: No, Councillor SUTTON—

Councillor SUTTON: —my point of clarification is— Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, Councillor JOHNSTON was suspended from the service of the Chamber because of her disorderly conduct. It was not about her speaking —I asked her to come back to the budget because she was straying in a big way, and I am just in the process of looking— Councillor TOOMEY, if you can identify where Ferny Grove neighbourhood plan is in this budget, then you are able to speak on it. But when it’s not in this budget—and I’ve already asked Councillor TOOMEY to come back to the budget. Councillor TOOMEY: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Ferny Grove-Upper Kedron neighbourhood plan is an ongoing program that’s been funded through this budget. With the program allocation of this year’s budget, we’ll continue to provide a platform for my community to have their say and drive both their neighbourhood plans. Madam Chairman, in this program, public art is one element that adds to the subtropical feel and look of our city. Each year I’ve been in this place, residents of my ward have been awarded contributions for the streetscape art spaces. The artists in my ward are very talented, and I’m continually amazed at how they can turn a simple signal box or Energex box into a work of art for all residents to appreciate. I’m looking forward to seeing what my imaginative and talented residents will do this year with their signal boxes. I would like to thank Councillor SIMMONDS, the current Chair for this program, and his support for the artistic space, and I look forward to seeing new art pieces in our suburbs. I would like to thank the LORD MAYOR for his consideration, Councillor ADAMS as Finance Chair, and Councillor SIMMONDS as the Chair for City Planning. Finally, I would like to thank all the Council officers who have delivered and continue to deliver this program above and beyond the residents’ expectations to build a better Brisbane. I commend the program to the Chamber. Chairman: Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a few matters, Madam Chairman. I refer to Councillor HOWARD’s comments about Edward Street, Madam Chairman, and she seemed to think that the large amount of money being spent on the footpaths in Edward Street, I think something like $12 million overall, could be justified for the 6,000 residents in her ward that live somewhere within cooee of that footpath, Madam Chairman. Well, Madam Chairman, Councillor HOWARD, I think, probably reflects the city-centric view that she has of her ward, and the city-centric view of the Administration with pouring money into the inner city, pouring money into the inner city, and in the outer suburbs like Wynnum Manly, Madam Chairman, if you get like $1 million or a million-and-a-half for the SCIP, which is for your whole district, that’s the only one you’ll ever get, you’re very grateful, and that’s for 35-40,000 people. Councillor HOWARD thinks $12 million for 6,000 people who live somewhere, you know, around about— Councillor SIMMONDS: Point of order, Madam Chair. Councillor CUMMING: —somewhere around the streets, that that’s justified, Madam Chairman. Well— Chairman: Order! Order! There’s a point of order. Councillor SIMMONDS. Councillor SIMMONDS: I was wondering if the Councillor would take a question. Chairman: Councillor CUMMING, would you take a question? Councillor CUMMING: No.

Councillor SIMMONDS: Oh, I was just wondering if anyone from Wynnum has ever been in the CBD. Do they come into the CBD? Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS! Councillor CUMMING had said no. Councillor CUMMING: I’ll answer it anyhow. Madam Chair, Councillor HOWARD needs to realise if you’re going to justify that very large amount of expenditure, Madam Chairman, you cannot justify it by just with your local people. It’s got to be for the city as a whole, for the tourists and everyone like that. You’re out of touch with reality. You’re out of touch with reality. It’s a shame—you should talk to your own side of politics to see why they’re spending so much money, and get the story right, Madam Chair —get the story right. Madam Chair, anyhow, I go now to Brisbane Canvas, Madam Chairman, a good program. Last year there were 69 submissions put in by 43 artists, but only four sites, only four sites done across the city. So I guess I ask the sort of questions that Councillor SUTTON was asking— why does Councillor SIMMONDS hate street art, Madam Chairman? Councillors interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: The Heritage Incentive Scheme, Madam Chairman, $158,000 was approved for 19 heritage places, but it was less than half the amount allowed under the budget. So, Madam Chairman, will Councillor SIMMONDS guarantee the money will be spent this financial year on the Heritage Incentive Scheme? Are the owners of the properties advised of what was available? Can he try a bit harder to make sure the money is spent? Why does Councillor SIMMONDS hate heritage incentives, Madam Chairman? Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Please continue. Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair—sorry? Chairman: Please continue. Councillor CUMMING: There’s a lot of noise here, Madam Chair. Madam Chairman, I go back to basics on this, and Councillor SRI might be interested in this. At page 73, Councillor SRI, of the budget document, there’s one of the outcomes for this part of the Council budget is, ‘promoting a range of housing choices to facilitate affordable housing’, Madam Chairman. I did ask the Chair what Council had done in this regard during the Information Session, and it was a very wimpy sort of answer saying, ‘oh yes, we’ve approved a lot of units being built’, yes, you know, like sort of supply and demand argument, I suppose, but it wasn’t a very good one. Madam Chairman, the Administration needs to get serious, make genuine attempts to ensure affordable housing is being built in the city, or delete this line from the outcomes, Madam Chairman, because lip service is no service, Madam Chairman. Lip service is no service, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I turn now to neighbourhood planning. Neighbourhood planning, as we all know, it’s a badly flawed process these days. It’s getting worse as time goes on, Madam Chairman. When it was done in Wynnum Central many years ago, I did a survey of the whole ward. I sent out about 15,000 surveys to every household in the Wynnum Manly district and asked them what they thought of what was proposed, Madam Chairman. I got about 60% in favour of it, and we got thousands of responses. It was an excellent response, Madam Chairman. Now, the modern neighbourhood planning process, it encourages people to just focus on their own property, Madam Chairman. Just ignore what’s going to happen in the district as a whole—focus on your own property. You know, are

you going to be able to get more money out of your property by putting multi-storey buildings on your property, Madam Chairman? The public consultation is not good enough and, Madam Chairman, so neighbourhood planning is falling into disarray. The other thing about this budget, of course, is what new neighbourhood plans will there be next financial year, Madam Chairman? One suspects there might be none at all, Madam Chairman. One suspects the Administration can’t handle any more new neighbourhood plans, and there’ll be no new plans in the 2017-18 financial year, because they’ve got enough on their books already to keep them— But if that’s the case, Councillor SIMMONDS needs to come out and say it, Madam Chairman, not pretend that he’s going to do some great investigation sometime during the financial year. I suppose by the end of the financial year, he might be able to announce something new for the following financial year. That will be about the limit, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, Urban Futures Brisbane, Madam Chairman, this is a program that we haven’t got a great deal of confidence in. But the funding seems to have been slashed, Madam Chairman. It was allocated $221,000 in 2016-17, then $224,000, $229,000, and $237,000 in future years. This year the funding is slashed to $78,000, $131,000 then $136,000 and $140,000. So is Urban Futures on the way out, Madam Chairman? Is it on the way out? If so, it won’t be missed, Madam Chairman. It won’t be missed. Madam Chairman, on page 79, Service 4.2.3.1, it’s introduced a new term, Suburban Precinct Projects, Madam Chairman. Last year under that heading, there was specific references—there was an Aspley SCIP going to be done in a couple of years’ time. There’s improvement projects incorporating SCIPs were specified—SCIPs maintenance and rehabilitation was specified. Now, they’ve all been lumbered in, thrown in together in the one pot, Madam Chairman, but I object to this, because, Madam Chairman, that means there’s less detail in the budget, and we want more detail in the budget, not less detail. Is Aspley still going to get its SCIP? I don’t know who the Councillor is for Aspley. Councillor interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: Would they? I’d be careful, I’d be careful. That might be the— Councillor interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: That might be the first step in you missing out there, Councillor for Aspley. Madam Chairman, the— Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS, allow Councillor CUMMING to speak. Councillor CUMMING: Madam Chairman, this is another example of the secrecy of this Administration, the lack of detail in the budget. Of course, poor old Vibrant Laneways, what’s happened to Vibrant Laneways? They’ve lost their vibrancy. They’ve lost their vibrancy. They’ve lost their vibrancy, yes, and they’re dead ducks, Madam Chairman—they’re dead ducks, the poor old Vibrant Laneways. That was a dud idea. The handling of it got worse as time went on, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, then of course, page 80, 4.2.3.2, we’ve got the Expo public artworks, $555,000, Madam Chairman. That is serious money, Madam Chairman, over half a million dollars spent on nostalgia tripping, Madam Chairman. That’s a lot of money. This is the cost of pulling a few artworks out of storage and setting them up somewhere, and recasting a couple of items, Madam Chairman. I think it’s an extravagant exercise, especially when you do a comparison to the $85,629 that’s been allowed for— Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: I draw to your attention the disorderly conduct of Councillor BOURKE and Councillor SIMMONDS who continue to interrupt Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor interjecting. Chairman: All Councillors are reminded not to interject. There has been a bit of banter going on between Councillor BOURKE and Councillor SIMMONDS whilst Councillor CUMMING has been speaking. I ask you to refrain from interjecting. Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING: Thank you. Thank you, Councillor SRI, but as l said to you I think one other time, you’ve got to be thick-skinned in this place, Madam Chairman, especially when you're Opposition, you know. Anyhow, Madam Chairman, so only $85,629 has been allowed for the Brisbane City Council contribution to bus driver safety, and you can compare that with $555,000 for the Expo public artworks, Madam Chairman. It’s a sad reflection on the approach and the attitude of this Administration to various items, Madam Chairman. They’re big on parties and nostalgia tripping, and they’re not as serious in any way, shape or form to bus driver safety, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor ALLAN. Councillor ALLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise to enter the debate and speak to the valuable work that has been undertaken and is embedded through, or throughout, the 11 punchy and succinct pages of Program 4 – Future Brisbane. I would like to thank the LORD MAYOR and Councillor SIMMONDS for the diligent and challenging work they undertake to deliver for the growing population of Brisbane and shaping this great city. This program supports the dynamic growth and planning for Brisbane, Australia’s New World City, that provides for and promotes a city that is prosperous, and well-designed, with a distinctive subtropical character. As the program title states, this program is all about the future, looking forward, having a vision. The Administration continues to balance growing an economically prosperous city that can provide strong and varied employment outcomes as the economy evolves for the residents of today and tomorrow, while enhancing leisure and lifestyle opportunities, and ensuring environmental protection and outcomes. It is not an easy balancing act. However, through clear leadership and sophisticated robust frameworks, a pathway and shape is provided for the growth of our New World City. Through Outcome 4.1 Planning for a Growing City, Council aims to maintain Brisbane’s prosperity through sustainable population and employment growth, enhancing lifestyle opportunities, ensuring environmental outcomes, and a modern and responsive land use planning and development framework for the city, a framework that is guided and takes into account the policies outlined in the South East Queensland Regional Plan. The Brisbane City Plan 2014 is the planning mechanism for the future development and shape of Brisbane. Our city and suburbs are constantly changing as the challenges of a growing population and gentrification continue to give rise to ongoing transition in our dynamic city. I would just like to touch on Outcome 4.2 Enhancing Brisbane’s Liveability, which captures this Administration’s successful neighbourhood planning process. The process plans, enables and delivers policies and projects that ensure a viable mix of employment and residential opportunities, and protection and enhancement of local character and the natural environment. There is no doubt that the preparation of neighbourhood plans is a positive process for communities, particularly those undergoing transition such as Northgate Ward.

Madam Chairman, I’d like to touch on Outcome 4.3 Approving Quality Development. The Brisbane City Plan 2014 is Council’s plan for the future development of Brisbane and guides how land is used and developed. It provides a best practice, efficient and user-friendly development framework, that is supported by the online platform, PD Online, and a range of support services such as information sheets, meet the planner sessions, and direct contact with planners as required. This outcome also captures the Suburban Construction Management Team, which has a critical capability, particularly in ensuring that projects being undertaken are consistent with the approvals package and regulations related to construction projects such as noise, dust and traffic management. In the past year we’ve had cause to call upon this group on a number of occasions and have had excellent service and outcomes. It is pleasing to see funding of this service continued this year. Madam Chairman, with particular reference to Service 4.2.1.1 on page 77 and page 83, the funding of ongoing neighbourhood plans, which in order to rebut, the issue that Councillor SUTTON raised earlier, I’d like to use the Northgate neighbourhood planning process to refute the claims she has made. Councillor SUTTON’s earlier comments suggested that there was a lack of engagement and consultation. If what I have experienced in the Northgate neighbourhood planning process is a lack of engagement, I will take it every day. Over 11,000 survey responses were received, the highest response rate ever. Over 70 nominations to join the Community Planning Team— Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: I’m really sorry to be nit-picky, but I have to question how this can be considered relevant, when what Councillor JOHNSTON was talking about earlier was not considered relevant, because she was also talking about her— Chairman: Thank you, Councillor SRI. All you had to do is say ‘relevance’. Councillor ALLAN, can you bring your comments back to the particular point in the budget where this neighbourhood plan is funded? Councillor ALLAN: It’s funded on page 83, neighbourhood plan funding for the next four years. This is a current plan. Chairman: Thank you. Councillor SUTTON: Point of order, Madam Chair. It’s actually not specifically mentioned on that budget page. Councillor interjecting. Councillor SUTTON: It’s actually not. It’s actually not in the pages of the budget, which is part of the issue in terms of consistency, that we’re concerned about. Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, I have asked Councillor ALLAN to identify his neighbourhood—there is a difference between neighbourhood plans that have been done and gone and in the past. This is a current plan that is currently funded under the budget program, under neighbourhood plans. Similarly, other people have been able to talk about their neighbourhood plans that are currently funded, so therefore I will allow Councillor ALLAN to continue. Councillor ALLAN: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Councillor SUTTON, this is really helping to—through you, Madam Chair— this is really rebutting some of the claims you’ve made which relate to engagement, the outcomes, the community input, and I think this is illustrative. In the context of this neighbourhood plan, Council has been partnering with the local community. Residents, business owners and property owners have been actively engaged in this project through the survey and Community Planning

Team process. As mentioned earlier, these have had very significant engagement and very positive outcomes. The engagement we’ve had, the numbers of responses, the number of people who’ve not only nominated for this neighbourhood planning process, and those who’ve been appointed, the engagement and enthusiasm has been very, very high. In terms of the potential of the neighbourhood planning process, once again the Banyo-Northgate neighbourhood planning process is informative. There are significant precincts here which the community realise have much better potential. There is old industry and warehousing, which the community can see has much greater uses. It has great potential to be used for residential, mixed use and community use. There’s old infrastructure, in this case the Bindha Train Station, which is massively underutilised, and is surrounded by areas that have potential for terrific transformation. We have a number of precincts across the ward which have already started the gentrification journey. There are a number of other precincts across the Northgate Ward that present with this type of opportunity, and which this neighbourhood planning process will allow to emerge. As with all wards, the neighbourhood planning process helps to extract shortages or shortcomings in wards, and in the context of this particular ward, we have a shortage of aged care facilities. We have a shortage of retirement facilities. We could certainly do with additional green space and community facilities. Drawing these out is a key objective and outcome from the neighbourhood planning process. It identifies areas that could give way to commercial hubs that support technology, start-ups for creative industries, to enhance the commercial sustainability of all wards, and provide local jobs. The completion of the planning process will enhance the amenity, liveability and economic development of the Northgate Ward and, for that matter, a number of local wards. It will make it a great place to live, work and relax. In conclusion, I’d like to say how important it is to have a strong city planning framework that supports the growth and shape of our city in years to come. As our city grows and our communities evolve, a planning framework that can adapt and provide vision to the future, provides residents and other stakeholders with insights as to what may happen around them in years to come. I would like to thank Council officers who have worked hard in developing this program. This is a complex program that is very broad, is impacted by many variables, engages a lot of stakeholders, and is highly visible. I commend you for your efforts, and I commend the program to the Chamber. Thank you. Chairman: Further speakers? Councillor GRIFFITHS. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on Future Brisbane, and in particular to speak on neighbourhood planning. I just want to say that the neighbourhood planning is one of the key features of the Administration. They sell the fact that they do neighbourhood planning so well. I don’t necessarily share that view, but that is the process they use to plan our local communities. Madam Chair, during the budget session, we weren’t able to get information in relation to where new neighbourhood plans are proposed, which is an odd thing not to be able to get from a budget session. But I would like to put a proposal up for a neighbourhood plan, that both Councillor STRUNK and I would like for residents for our area. We’re proposing a neighbourhood plan for Durack, Inala, Doolandella, Ellen Grove, and also for Oxley. The reason we’re proposing a neighbourhood plan for that is because there are currently some developments out that way that are quite inappropriate in their proposed development.

We would like to see that the opportunity for residents to participate in rezoning, stays with residents, and not through backdoor means of town planners or this Administration. Councillor BOURKE: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor BOURKE. Councillor BOURKE: That is clearly imputing motive, and I’d ask you to ask Councillor GRIFFITHS to withdraw those comments. Chairman: Yes, Councillor— Councillor GRIFFITHS: No, I won’t, Madam Chair. Chairman: Sorry? Councillor GRIFFITHS: I won’t withdraw. Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, ‘backdoor means’ is not an appropriate phraseology. Would you care— Councillor GRIFFITHS: I won’t withdraw it, Madam Chair. Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS— Councillor GRIFFITHS: No, no, I won’t withdraw it. Chairman: —that is imputing motive against Council officers. I give you this last option to withdraw before I give you a direction to withdraw. Councillor GRIFFITHS: No, I won’t withdraw it. Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, are you refusing to—I direct you to withdraw. Councillor GRIFFITHS: No, I won’t. Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, you are refusing to comply with my direction as Chairman of this Council. I will give you one final opportunity to withdraw the statement imputing motive against Council officers. That is my direction. Councillor GRIFFITHS, will you comply with my direction? Councillor GRIFFITHS: I don’t believe I’m imputing motive against— Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, will you comply with my direction? Councillor GRIFFITHS: I don’t believe I’m imputing motive against the officers, and no, I won’t withdraw. Chairman: So you are refusing to comply with my direction. Councillor GRIFFITHS, I hereby require that your conduct be noted in the Minutes of this Council for refusing to comply with my direction.

Order under section 186A of the City of Brisbane Act 2010 that disorderly conduct by Councillor Steven GRIFFITHS be noted in the minutes

Chairman: Think very carefully about what you’re saying and what you’re imputing against Council officers, Councillor GRIFFITHS. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Thank you, Madam Chair. It will just be added to the list of reprimands I’ve received. I just want to reinforce that we believe that there is a need for a neighbourhood plan out in this area, that there has been significant growth. There has been no neighbourhood plan for a very long time. It has been neglected by the Administration, and now there are proposals to re-zone education land, to re-zone education land, for high rise, for medical centres, for— Councillor SIMMONDS: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Councillor GRIFFITHS: —a range of developments.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SIMMONDS. Councillor SIMMONDS: Madam Chairman, you’ve allowed a broad spectrum, but really this is off topic. We’re now talking about a neighbourhood plan that doesn’t exist, and isn’t funded in the budget, and not only that, but we’re now talking about changing the zoning of individual properties. It is not a part of this budget. Chairman: Thank you, Councillor— Councillor SUTTON: Point of order— Chairman: Just a moment. One point of order at a time, please. Councillor GRIFFITHS, I remind you that zoning, whilst it may be a form of planning, it is not an integral part of this budget. We are talking about the funding for programs, and that is where you need to bring your comments back to. Councillor SUTTON, you have a point of order. Councillor SUTTON: Well, my point of order is that, to date, this Administration hasn’t advised which new neighbourhood plans will be funded in this year’s budget. Therefore, how can anyone make a claim or assertion that this neighbourhood plan is not funded in this year’s budget? So— Chairman: Yes, Councillor SUTTON, I take— Councillor SUTTON: —no neighbourhood plan is listed in this budget. Chairman: Look, Councillor SUTTON, I understand what your point of order is, but what the point that I brought Councillor GRIFFITHS up on, and what was raised by Councillor SIMMONDS, was that he was going beyond the proposal for a neighbourhood plan to be funded in the forwards, and he was then transgressing into zonings of individual properties. So that’s where I asked him to come back. Thank you. Councillor GRIFFITHS. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Thanks, Madam Chair. I will just refer to page 77, where it talks about the purpose of neighbourhood plans, it’s a planning tool, ‘used to manage change, accommodate growth and protect natural and community values at a local area’. I was providing an example of where there’s change proposed, but it is not being done through a neighbourhood planning process. So I was actually providing an example of the very change that Council has been asked to make, but they haven’t been able to include residents in that process. Madam Chair, this is precisely the reason we need a neighbourhood plan out that way, is because we want the community to be involved. In fact, Councillor STRUNK and I are very committed to getting the community very actively involved with a neighbourhood plan out that way, so that there can be discussion with all the community, and so the Chairperson and other members can come out and face the community and explain the proposals they have for the community out there. Madam Chair, this is important. It’s disappointing that the Chairperson hid the information in regards to neighbourhood planning and where— Councillor SIMMONDS: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SIMMONDS. I suspect you’re going to say imputing motive? Councillor SIMMONDS: Absolutely imputing motive. I have provided an honest answer to the question, and that insinuation is insulting. Chairman: Thank you.

Councillor GRIFFITHS, I don’t believe Councillor SIMMONDS has been hiding anything. He’s been quite upfront with a lot of his statements that he’s provided in relation to this program. Bring your remarks back to what’s in the budget document, please. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Madam Chair, when a Chairperson can’t tell you where neighbourhood planning is going to occur in the next 12 months, that is just an amazing lack of knowledge about his department. When he refuses to give you that information, it’s even more amazing. We believe— Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, I don’t believe Councillor SIMMONDS has refused anything. Just come back and talk about the budget, please. Councillor GRIFFITHS: Well, I would welcome Councillor SIMMONDS telling the Chamber where the new neighbourhood plans are going to be, because he couldn’t do it during the Information Session. Anyway, the point is, Madam Chair, because he hasn’t done it in the Information Session, we can talk about where we’re proposing to have a neighbourhood plan, and where we’d like to see a neighbourhood plan, and that’s what I am getting up here today to represent Councillor STRUNK and myself, and the community out there so that they actually get a fair dinkum say about what’s going on in this city, and it’s not all left up to the developers. Chairman: Councillor WINES.

ADJOURNMENT: 663/2016-17 At that time, 3.12pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Andrew WINES, seconded by Councillor Steven TOOMEY, that the meeting adjourn for a period of 15 minutes, to commence only when all Councillors had vacated the Chamber and the doors have been locked.

UPON RESUMPTION:

At that time, 3.30pm, the Deputy Chairman, Councillor Vicki HOWARD, assumed the Chair. Deputy Chairman: Further debate? Councillor RICHARDS. Councillor RICHARDS: Thank you, Deputy Madam Chairman. I rise to speak on Program 4 – Future Brisbane, Australia's New World City, and how this Administration is the one that provides for and promotes a future city that is prosperous with a distinct subtropical character. The major amendment package to the City Plan 2014 was developed in response to State Government legislative changes, as well as responding to industry and community feedback on the plan. Council resolved to prepare this package in September 2015 however, due to statutory requirements, these packages can take 18 months to two years before they're included into the City Plan. The major A amendment package was publicly notified in November 2016, and in May 2017, Council considered submissions on the major amendment and resolved to progress the finalised amendments which are currently with the Queensland Government for second State interest check. In addition to major A amendment there have been four additional major amendment packages in Biodiversity areas overlay mapping and Pre-1911 building overlay mapping, recently publicly notified with submissions closing on 6 June 2017. The fourth major amendment was an innovative package of aged care amendments. This major amendment was submitted to the Queensland Government in December 2016 for the first interest review. Despite

there being no State interest relevant to these initiatives, the Queensland Government have not yet approved this package for public notification. The fifth package, major C amendment, is currently with the Queensland Government for the first State interest review. The key features of this package are proposed revisions to the Bushfire overlay code to respond to industry feedback on practicality of application and clarity around methodology for bushfire reports. The area of real interest in recent months for the residents in the Pullenvale Ward is the Biodiversity areas overlay. In June 2016, Council proposed to prepare revised Biodiversity areas overlay mapping for the city. The Queensland Government recently approved the proposed amendments to public notification, and submissions on this major amendment which closed on Tuesday 6 June 2017. The proposed amendments are based on the recently completed city wide vegetation mapping undertaken by the Queensland Herbarium. This new Biodiversity area mapping will contribute to achieving a 40% natural habitat target, deliver improved accuracy of mapped regional ecosystems, ensure protection of key habitat and provide transparency around key areas required for strategic restoration, reflect Queensland Government legislation by mapping matters of State environmental significance and reflect land use, such as recent development outcomes and revegetation areas. As I mentioned in Program 3 – Clean, Green and Sustainable, Pullenvale is a ward that is rich in country lifestyle yet close to city living, that offers so much to its residents and, in particular, acreage living. Most residents living on acreage are experienced in managing their properties. Many have been involved in planting native vegetation in areas away from the houses and recreation areas. Council has set itself a target of 40% natural habitat that will cover across the Council's local government area, be it public ownership such as the Brisbane Forest Park, as well as land in private ownership. The burden of the scheme changes will fall heavily on the owners of acreage, such as the residents of the western suburbs. It will limit their rights to use their private land in the way they wish, in terms of private recreation, the keeping of livestock and the building of infrastructure associated with those purposes. Ground-truthing will prove much of the mapping to what relates to privately owned land is not reflective of what is really on the land. The approach to this overlay for the residents of the Pullenvale Ward is challenging. Residents value the biodiversity being mapped with the process that could be delivered in a way that the mapping is able to be altered, through the mechanism of a property map of assessable vegetation, as per the State vegetation scheme. The key changes to note about the Biodiversity area mapping include: updated overlay reflecting recent information from the Queensland Herbarium about the location of regional ecosystems in Brisbane; refining ecological corridor alignments to reflect current circumstances, reinforcing the strategic intent of overlay by identifying restoration opportunities within the overlay and strategic subcategories; aligning koala mapping with State mapping, and including State mapping of matters of State environmental significance in the planning scheme for alignment with Queensland Government's environmental offsets framework; refining the categories of the Biodiversity areas overlay for effectiveness and clarity of interpretation; and making corresponding refinements and amendments to biodiversity related provisions of the planning scheme. So, Deputy Madam Chairman, I want to congratulate the LORD MAYOR, the Chairman of City Planning and all the Council officers, who I thank immensely for all your efforts and time you contribute to this program— Councillor interjecting.

Councillor RICHARDS: —and in planning on taking Brisbane's community along the journey, building community understanding and ownership of planning and growth management. This partnership is essential in this, Australia's New World City. I commend this program forward to the Chamber. Thank you, Deputy Madam Chairman. Deputy Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SIMMONDS, could you please close the debate? Councillor SIMMONDS: Yes, I certainly can, Madam Deputy Chair, and thank you very to all the Councillors—there we go, I’ve got the stopwatch going now. Thank you very much to all the Councillors who contributed as part of this debate. Well look, just a couple of points in rebuttal, if I may, to try and tie up some of the comments, particularly from the Labor Councillors on the other side of the Chamber. Look, first we might deal with one of the Councillor SUTTON's comments. She did go first. We seem to go down a rabbit hole to judge the program by the size of its pages, the number of pages. It was my equivalent of the small streets, I guess, that we had thrown around in Program 2. It's incredible that for a budget the size of this, that delivers as much as this, that these are the kind of debating points that the Labor Councillors get lost in. But I was reminded of an old adage when Councillor SUTTON was speaking, which is that it's not the size of the program that counts, but it's how you use it— Councillors interjecting. Councillor SIMMONDS: —and we use it very, very, very well in Program 4. The officers exceed the outcomes that are set for them, and the amount that they deliver on the ground for Brisbane residents as a result of the funding they have, just simply demonstrates how this Administration continually strives to deliver more for less for Brisbane residents so we can manage the finances responsibly. Look, it's an absolute nonsense that we would ever think that this program would be bigger than any other program, that it would be the biggest, because quite rightly public and active transport and infrastructure take up the majority of the budget. That's how it was when I was Finance Chairman, that is a continued priority for this Administration, and it's something all Administration Councillors support. The next point was, of course, Councillor CUMMING's dismissal of the funding provided to redo the Expo 88 artwork. This is very disappointing, but pretty typical of the Leader of the Opposition. He hates our history. He hates the way that this Administration— Councillor interjecting. Councillor SIMMONDS: —preserves it. He hates heritage, preserving heritage, in this place. I get what he was saying—it's easier to just throw these things in a dustbin, it's easier to demolish a character house than try and do it up, as Councillor CUMMING did. But that is not the track that this Administration is taking. We believe in celebrating our history, in preserving our character, because if this Administration and this budget doesn't, who will? Well, the Labor Councillors certainly won't. They've proved that time and time again. They proved it by electing, as the Leader of the Opposition, a man who demolished his own character property. So look—so we absolutely support that particular funding, new funding, that was provided as part of the 2017-18 financial Budget. Councillor CUMMING also mentioned affordable housing. In fact, he accused me of giving a weak, I think is how he described it, a weak answer to the question of affordable housing around, quote, unquote, ‘this supply thing’, the supply argument that he seemed to think was a bit nefarious. I don’t think he's got the Labor Party memo, because this is exactly—the argument of supply and demand to address affordable housing, is exactly the

argument that his Labor colleagues are using up in George Street. In fact, only recently, would it surprise the Councillors to know, that they— Councillor CUMMING just re-entered the Chamber. Please, I'm talking about affordable housing and the fact that you separated so far from your Labor colleagues up in George Street, through you Madam Deputy Chairman, that they just recently released the Queensland Housing Strategy Action Plan. I quote— this is what the Labor Government says about affordable housing, ‘affordable housing is to include smaller lots and allotments to deal with the missing middle’. That's their action plan to deal with affordable housing, smaller lots in Brisbane, and the missing middle, which is the townhouses. So the question is, does Councillor CUMMING disagree and split from his Labor colleagues of the State, that more supply is needed to deal with affordable housing, and will he— if not, if he supports his Labor colleagues—I trust that he'll be supporting townhouse applications and the like, the missing middle kind of applications, that are coming through to try and provide those affordable housing options in his own ward. I'm guessing that he won't, but he should be if he's going to be consistent with Labor Party policy. Madam Deputy Chairman, in terms of neighbourhood plan plans, let's deal with that. It was disappointing to hear Councillor SUTTON be disparaging of CPTs, and community planning. This is again supported by her Labor colleagues in George Street. I've mentioned just recently that they released the State Government toolkit on community consultation, that they put out for all councils in Queensland. Guess what, it includes something called a ‘community reference group’, which bears—despite the slightly different name—a striking similarity to what this Administration has pioneered in the CPTs. Councillor interjecting. Councillor SIMMONDS: So again, Labor Party in George Street thinks it's a good way to go. It's proved very successful when run by this Administration, it is the Labor Councillors and, again, you know, again when we're talking about communication opportunities for neighbourhood plan plans, well, there's lots of opportunities. There are three separate consultation processes over a two year—18 month to two-year period, which I might say is two more than what is required of other councils under the State Labor Government's Act. So the opportunity is there, but I think it was clear during the debate that some Councillors do it better than others. It was clear from Councillor ALLAN's debate how he has generated so much feedback in the early stage of the neighbourhood plan, how he's involved his community, how he's gone out and actively sought their involvement and to have a conversation with them, and use the Council resources in order to do it. Then it was contrasted with, for example, Councillor SRI, who simply asked for more personal political staff in his office, or Councillor JOHNSTON, who was also upset about the lack of consultation. In fact, she said that there was no opportunity for us to take feedback from residents and businesses involved in this process. (Comments removed at the request of the CEO, in accordance with the AP068 Production of Council Minutes Policy approved by Council on 8 August 2012) Councillor interjecting. Councillor SIMMONDS: (Comments removed at the request of the CEO, in accordance with the AP068 Production of Council Minutes Policy approved by Council on 8 August 2012) So that's the difference between a Councillor who wants to involve their community, like Councillor OWEN in the neighbourhood plan planning process, and those who don't, those simply want to use it for political purposes, like Councillor SRI and Councillor JOHNSTON. I think that's a very disappointing thing for the local communities. With regards to new neighbourhood plan plans, we've heard a lot of debate about that and, again, I've been up front that once the budget has been locked in

through this Chamber, we will then start to look at what new planning processes we want to undertake. You’d think we're not doing anything, but in fact we've got eight plans on the go. I just—what strikes me is the hypocrisy, because Councillor GRIFFITHS wants to stand up and suggest an appropriate new neighbourhood plan. Now if I'd come to the Chamber, to the budget debate, with what new plans we were doing locked and loaded, I would have been accused of not being consultative, of not being collaborative and not taking on local Councillors' suggestions. Yet here he is, standing up, giving us a suggestion. I now have the opportunity to take that on board and consider it, where I wouldn't have if it was already locked, and I'm still, still, being attacked for now not locking those things in, so that he actually gets a look in when he makes a suggestion. Well, the point is it's blatant hypocrisy, because they don’t actually care about what new neighbourhood plans are being undertaken. They don’t actually care if their suggestions are taken up. They simply want to play political games with neighbourhood planning in the city, and that is a great shame for the people of Brisbane. Madam Deputy Chairman, just a touch also on the Heritage Incentive Scheme. This raised a little bit of debate. This is a fantastic scheme. Last financial year we delivered $158,900 in grant spending, which was leveraged many times over, over 19 projects. To respond to Councillor CUMMING's comments, well look, the grant funding that's put out into the community, that's awarded, does not match the figure in the book exactly, because the figure in the book also provides for an officer, who provides free advice and architectural advice to people who own heritage properties. Anyone who owns a heritage property can take advantage of that, and I did say that during the Budget Information Session, if you cared to listen. The other thing is we do have a contingency in there for wet weather, if there's a large storm and a lot of work suddenly comes in. Of course, also the fact that there are no grants currently outstanding. So we have catered well for it. For the Suburban Construction Management Taskforce, in terms of resources, well, there are many CARS (Compliance and Regulatory Services) officers behind them who are there to support them. The funding drop for UFB is because the IBB (Inclusive Brisbane Board) has moved to another program. I'd like to thank, because I've run out of time, Councillor HOWARD, my wonderful Deputy, and David Gard who's in the Chamber here today, for his hard work and the other officers, and I commend the program to the Chamber. Thank you. Deputy Chairman: I will now put Program 4 – Future Brisbane Program.

Motion put: The Deputy Chairman submitted to the Chamber the motion for the adoption of the Future Brisbane Program and it was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillor Andrew WINES, and Councillor Steven TOOMEY, immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.

AYES: 18 - The DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.

NOES: 6 - The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK, Shayne SUTTON and Jonathan SRI.

The Deputy Chairman then called upon Councillor Matthew BOURKE to present the Lifestyle and Community Services Program. 5. LIFESTYLE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM: 664/2016-17 Councillor Matthew BOURKE, Chairman of the Lifestyle and Community Services Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Steven HUANG, that for the services of the Council the allocations for the Operations and the Projects for the year 2017-18 and the Rolling Projects for the Lifestyle and Community Services Program as contained on pages 84 to 108 and the indicative schedule on page 180 so far as they relate to Program 5, be adopted.

Deputy Chairman: Councillor BOURKE. Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Deputy Chairman. It's my pleasure to rise today as the Chairman for the Lifestyle and Community Services Committee to present to the Chamber Program 5 of the LORD MAYOR's Annual Budget for 2017-18. We know through Program 5 that the City of Brisbane is being kept on the right track. But we are investing like never before into lifestyle or leisure opportunities for the residents of Brisbane, and continuing to keep Brisbane as Australia's New World City. Madam Chairman, we continue to invest in social programs as well as to develop the cultural and creative wellbeing of our city, while maintaining the high living standards of the residents of Brisbane. So it is great to see increased investment again through Program 5 into these program areas. It is a little bit disappointing, and I was saddened last Friday, when the Leader of the Opposition stood up to deliver his budget reply speech in this place, because despite being allocated 45 minutes to speak, he only used 25 minutes, and not once, not once, mentioned a single item in Program 5, Madam Chairman, not once. Councillor interjecting. Councillor BOURKE: Not once, Madam Chairman. So clearly void of any support, or any ideas around lifestyles and leisure opportunities. It is sad Councillor CUMMING, not taking this important program seriously for the people of Brisbane. Program 5 has an increased expenditure of nearly $10 million, focused on libraries, pools, our leased sites, sports fields, as well as our cemeteries. As I said, this is the program that delivers on the cultural and creative wellbeing of our city, and it is great to see ongoing continued investment. Madam Chairman, festivals across our city deliver artistic, economic and social benefits to all of our residents. They bring together communities, they build a sense of identity, as well as supporting an inclusive approach for our city. Once again, Madam Chairman, this Administration is investing in festivals like never before. They add to the lifestyle and leisure opportunities, and there is a total of $3.9 million being invested into festivals and events across our city. Particularly, I know, Madam Chairman, that all Councillors will love to see the 70 suburban festivals, with an allocation of $760,000 right across the city, once again funded in this year's budget. We have events like the Bardon Community Carols, the Darra Street Festival, the Ferny Grove Festival, the Nundah Village Festival, Madam Chairman, the Mt Gravatt Show, the Runcorn Family Fun Day, the Pullenvale Folk Festival, just to name a few. We also continue our investment into multicultural festivals across the city, and $547,000 is allocated to the 38 multicultural festivals that we continue our support for, including India Day Fair, Paniyiri, the Scandinavian Festival, the St Patrick's Day Festival in your own ward, Madam Chairman, just to name a

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 238 few as well. That's a total of 112 festivals and cultural organisations that are supported out of this part of the Program 5 budget alone. We will also see ongoing investment into our popular Lord Mayor's Tuesday concerts here in the City Hall, the Bands in the Park program, the BrisAsia Festival and the QUBE Effect, which is a fantastic creative outlet for young people in our community. I note that just last Saturday night, we had the awards for the QUBE Effect down at the Powerhouse. Madam Chairman, all of these investments contribute to the realisation of three key strategies that sit in Program 5—the Creative Brisbane Creative Economy Strategy, our Seniors Strategy, as well as our Youth Strategy. The festivals and events I've outlined all play an important role in realising these strategies. Madam Chairman, I turn to the Museum of Brisbane, the Powerhouse and City Hall. Once again, we can see considerable funding being provided for these Brisbane institutions. We see the Museum of Brisbane with its three-year funding agreement being provided for once again, and this Administration continues our strong commitment to protecting and preserving the social and artistic history of our city. We also see, Madam Chairman, additional funding for the Powerhouse this year —$3.2 million has been provided, and this will go towards helping develop further their master plan, as well as their ongoing operations. The Powerhouse is some 17 years old, and it needs continual renewal and reinvestment to make sure that it stays one of the premier places for young people and for the creative community in our city to put on performances, to engage, to network and to develop their works. We also see, Madam Chairman, the Australian Performing Arts Market (APAM) receiving $278,000 this financial year. APAM will take place in February 2018, and is a perfect platform for up and coming artists to showcase their talents to significant crowds in a bid to publicly promote their work to professional artists and judges. Madam Chairman, turning to City Hall, and with your indulgence I just want to take one moment to say some words about the Honourable Con Sciacca, which was mentioned by Councillor SUTTON, just before. I had the pleasure of working with Mr Sciacca during my time on the restoration project. He was a key and integral member of our fundraising arm that helped secure significant funds for the restoration project. I also know that the LORD MAYOR spoke to Mr Sciacca just last week and passed on his thanks and appreciation for the work that he did in that endeavour. It was an honour and a pleasure to have time, and be able to spend time with a humble, very intelligent, very knowledgeable individual, and I just recall many of the conversations that I had the opportunity to have with Con, not just during the work that we did, but at other times as well. I just pass on my best wishes to all of the Sciacca family for this terrible loss. Madam Chairman, we continue, as I said, our investment to protect and preserve the people's place, City Hall. There are additional allocations in this year's budget to continue our ongoing work, to preserve and restore this building, as well as the ongoing maintenance and the community service obligation which goes to support community groups and not-for-profit organisations to hold events. There is also continued funding for the Red Cross Night Cafe, which operates in this building, as well as the Over-50s Club which occupy part of the basement. Madam Chairman, there's also funding this year for the Seven Hills TAFE site, which sees a capital investment of $1.4 million. This site is part of an infrastructure agreement and we're currently working with the developer to secure the handover and finalise the fit out requirements. Madam Chairman, we also see our ongoing investment and support of the MacArthur Museum. We know that on 22 July this year we will celebrate the

75th anniversary of General Douglas MacArthur's arrival to the City of Brisbane and the important role that that played in not only the history of our city, but indeed, turning the tide in the Second World War. There will be a commemorate re-enactment with General Douglas MacArthur's arrival in Brisbane on that day on the 22nd, and I encourage all Councillors to be a part of that and to come along and celebrate this rich part of Brisbane's history. Madam Chairman, I turn to our libraries. Our libraries are the best in the country, if not the world. We have a dedicated team who work tirelessly to make sure we're providing the most up-to-date, the most technologically advanced, and the best libraries possible. Our network of 33 libraries provide access to information and opportunities for learning, recreational reading and cultural activities right across this city. Over past year, our libraries have become more than just buildings. They are now community hubs. They're an integral part of our smart thinking, easy living New World City. We continue invest, Madam Chairman, in the 2017-18 Budget. We saw 6.2 million visitors alone to our Council libraries last year with over nine million loans or borrowings in that same period of time. One of the key projects that we implemented that saw this increase was our extended library hours on Saturdays. It was an election commitment Madam Chairman, and we continue to fund that election commitment in this year's budget. We also saw the opening of the new Chermside Library and the new Wynnum Library. In that same vein, there are funds in the 2017-18 Budget to continue to deliver the new Bracken Ridge Library, Madam Chairman, with works being planned as we speak. This will see a brand new library provided for residents on the northside Madam Chair, in the Bracken Ridge Ward, and will involve obviously not only the library itself, but also a new ward office. We also see significant allocations of funds for the New Farm Park Library upgrade in your own ward, as well as the Garden City Library upgrade and an extension to the Mitchelton Library car park. Madam Chairman, the Garden City Library is one of the city's busiest libraries with more than 540,000 annual visitations, and it will benefit immensely from the significant works that we’ll be undertaking. There will be new and upgraded quiet rooms, a children's library, three meeting rooms, which is now the standard across all our libraries, as well as accessible toilet facilities. Madam Chair, this will provide well for the future for the residents living in and around the Garden City area. Madam Chairman, one of the challenges we have as a city is providing adequate and up-to-date facilities for sports groups and for people to be active and healthy. In this budget, we continue to deliver on our Active and Healthy Program. There is funding to support our Active and Healthy Parks Program to the tune of $728,000. Last year we saw 58,000 people engage in over 4,500 activities, and we’ll continue with our investment this year to grow that program and engage with even more people. Madam Chair, we also have to support our community groups who manage and maintain leased facilities across the city. That's why, through the Community Facility Improvement Program, we'll continue to invest and partner with these individuals and groups. So the old St Philip's Church building in the Chandler Ward will be converted into a community hall. The Kalinga Scout Hall and the Bulimba Bowls Club will have works done to their rooves. Madam Chairman, the old Council depot at Hamilton will have improvement works done so that we can make it fit to lease to community groups as well. We support over 600 leased sites across this city through our Community Leasing team, and I want to thank each and every one of those Council officers who do fantastic work with our voluntary organisations. Pools, Madam Chairman, we continue our investment in pools across the city. We have 22 pools across our city that provide great recreational and healthy activities for all residents. Madam Chair, we were pleased in the last 12 months

to open a new Parkinson Pool in Councillor OWEN's ward, and we continue our investment in upgrading improving pools right across the city. And Madam Chairman, so there is $2.5 million loaded in the 2017-18 Budget towards the reconstruction of the Langlands Pool in the Coorparoo Ward. It is our city's oldest pool, and the renewal of this facility will be very welcomed by residents on the southside. We also recognise though, Madam Chair, that there are younger people who enjoy using our pools. So we're allocating $2 million for the construction of aqua parks across four locations. We will see in this year the completion of the Wynnum Aqua Park, as well as design work and works happening on the Runcorn, as well as the Ferny Grove one, and the construction of the new Langlands Park, in terms of the work with the major pool upgrade that we're doing there. Madam Chairman, we also, as part of Program 5, deal with access and inclusion. Access and inclusion is a central plank to this Administration's way that we go about doing business. It was one of the first things that the LORD MAYOR implemented when he became LORD MAYOR in this place back in 2012, the creation of Brisbane City Council's first Access and Inclusion Plan. It is my great pleasure to inform the Chamber that we were recognised just on Tuesday at the National Local Government Awards as the category winner for Disability Access and Inclusion for our Brisbane City Council Access and Inclusion Plan 2012-2017. I want to take this opportunity to thank and congratulate all of the officers, and all of the organisations who have worked with Council to help achieve this national recognition for the work that we do in access and inclusion. Again, Madam Chairman, in this year's budget we continue to invest in access and inclusion right across our city. There is $3.4 million for the ongoing implementation of our Access and Inclusion Plan. It is great to see that work going ahead and it's great to see community groups getting engaged and being involved. Madam Chairman, we also support community organisations with our Building Stronger Community Grants, and we will continue with our $2.5 million injection into local community groups, for both facilities maintenance and construction, as well as organisational development. Madam Chairman, Program 5 delivers so much to the volunteer and community groups right across our city. We support all of those groups, and encourage all Councillors to support Program 5, and I commend it to the Chamber. Deputy Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Deputy Chair. I rise to speak on this program and can I say from the start that there's a lot of really great stuff in this program. I'm sure we'd all agree that this is a lot of the things that we can be proud of as Councillors, and I commend all the Councillors in this place for their continued support of those programs. I do however note that in the context of such a large City Council budget, the funding we allocate to these very valuable community services and programs is comparatively small. I don't think that's Councillor BOURKE's fault. I think that's a function of a political establishment that has capitulated to neoliberalism, and believes it's not the role of Council to provide large amounts of funding for community services and cultural programs. I'd like to run through a few issues that I have about this budget program. The first is around the Creative Hub. This was a commitment of the LORD MAYOR in the previous budget, and the money hasn't been spent, and it's been rolled for the next three years. I would respectfully suggest that part of the reason that Council hasn't spent the money, and hasn't yet been able to set up that West End

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 241 or South Brisbane Creative Hub, is because I, as the local Councillor, and the community have to some extent been cut out of the process. So you've allocated $300,000, but you were meant to spend $200,000 in the financial year that's just finishing. My understanding is that there's been some difficulty finding premises and working out the criteria and parameters of that program or project. I think part of the reason that Council has had that difficulty is because there's been a reluctance to involve the community and meaningfully involve and seek the support and input from myself, as the local Councillor for that area. So I look forward to working constructively with Council officers to support that project. I'm happy to work with you. It doesn't need to be kept secret from me. I think it's a really cool idea, and I want to see it go ahead, but the fact that the money's been rolled over suggests to me that maybe there have been some hiccups, and I would like to work constructively with you to help work through them. I also note the continual low allocation of funding towards Public Space Liaison Officers. Council employs a couple of Public Space Liaison Officers and they have a huge and very challenging job. They're the ones on the front line who are working with homeless people and rough sleepers to help connect them to the other services. They're the ones that have to do patrols early in the morning or late at night. They have a really tough, challenging job and they're stretched thin. I guess it's sad to me that in such a big city, with so many people and so much money, we allocate so little funding towards Public Space Liaison Officers. The money we spend on these officers would generate huge social benefits, if only we increased this program, and when we spend so much money on other parts of the Council budget, I don’t know why our spending on Public Space Liaison Officers is so small. I’d also like to raise my concerns that the local community festivals and multicultural festivals continue to receive far less funding than they deserve. I'm not saying that one festival receives more money than another festival, I'm simply saying that we could fund all of them a lot more. The total budget allocation for multicultural and community festivals is only something like $1.25 million per year, which is peanuts compared to what we're spending on road projects, and compared to what we're spending on a whole bunch of other budget items. I'm sure all Councillors in this place would agree that community festivals are amazing, that they bring people together. I won't go on about them, but they're great. So I don’t know why we don’t give them more money. I'm conscious that right now a lot of those community festivals, the funding they receive from Council ends up on a bit of a merry-go-round to pay for road closures so— because we have this highly bureaucratic road closure process, unlike other councils that facilitate community groups to have community road closures that don't have to comply with the same rules as property developers and construction company road closures. Because we don’t have that alternative process, community groups have to spend a lot of the money that we give them through this budgeting allocation back on road closures. It's a total ‘money-go-round’ and a real misuse of Council resources and the communities' limited resources. I also wanted to note my ongoing concerns that the Suburban Initiative Fund doesn't seem to be increasing in accordance with inflation. It seems like we just keep it to that same amount every year, even though the population is growing, projects are getting more expensive to deliver, there are more and more needs in the community, but local Council ward offices still only have that fairly small pot of money that they have to spread around and spread thinner and thinner. I'm also concerned by what appears to be fairly low funding for Brisbane Writers Festival and the Queensland Music Festival. These are premier events that attract attendees, but also writers and performers from all around the

world. They're amazing festivals, and they don’t deserve to be pushed to the side and allocated so little funding. The budget allocation for those festivals is wholly insufficient. I'd like to note with thanks and gratitude the inclusion of funding for the Musgrave Park Pool upgrade. Thank you, Councillor BOURKE. It's a really good inclusion. It's long overdue. That pool's gone decades without any kind of refurbishment or renovation, and I thank Council for allocating that money. Again, I emphasise the need for more funding for pools and community facilities in the budget as a whole. Finally, I'd like to raise my concerns that the West End Public Library still doesn't have disability-accessible toilets. This to me is—I guess it kind of makes a mockery of the idea of Brisbane being a New World City, doesn't it? When one of our oldest libraries, a much-loved library that's used by a lot of residents, doesn't even have a proper toilet. It's certainly not compliant with Council's requirements under the disability access legislation. But it also means that we can't employ Council librarians who have impaired mobility in that library. If someone in a wheelchair says, ‘oh, I'd like to work at West End Library’, we just have to say, ‘oh no, sorry, there's no toilet for you there’. That’s kind of messed up in 2017. It's a bit of a shame. I've previously made suggestions as to how a toilet block could be incorporated on that site. I've noted that there's room behind the library and that we could include causeways and have a separate detached toilet block that doesn't take away from the heritage values of the building. I put those suggestions in writing. I've written directly to the LORD MAYOR about it. To me, it seems like it's simply a question of allocating the money and the fact that we haven't allocated the money, I think, is reflective of this Council's priorities. I know the Council has a stated commitment to improving disability access, but when I've got older residents, when I've got people with impaired mobility saying, ‘I can't use West End Library because I have incontinence problems and I need to go to the toilet sometimes’, and there's no toilet there for them to use. Like that's pretty elementary. I don't know why, as I said, in 2017, a Councillor has to stand up in this place and argue for a toilet in a public library. I thought we'd be past that by now. So I hope Councillor BOURKE will take that on board as constructive criticism and work with me to deliver a toilet that everyone can use as part of that library. I understand currently there's not even a proper public toilet of any kind in that library, and that recently parents have said they're using the library and their kid needed to use the loo, have been told they have to go several hundred metres down the road to use another public toilet rather than using the toilet that's available to staff on the library premises. So anyway, I just think that—I hope some of the money that's there in that line item for Library Enhancement gets allocated towards improved toilet facilities at the West End Library. I say again, there's a lot of good stuff in this budget program, it's just a real shame we don’t allocate more funding to it because it should be valued more highly. Thank you. Deputy Chairman: Further debate? Councillor HUANG. Councillor HUANG: Thank you, Madam Deputy Chair. I rise to support Program 5 of 2017-18 Budget, Lifestyle and Community Services, with great enthusiasm. Madam Deputy Chair, Program 5 is an important program that is shaping the social infrastructure and will grow the soft power of our city. Madam Deputy Chair, the concept of soft power was developed by Joseph Nye, who was the dean of Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, which is commonly defined as the ability to shape the preferences of others

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 243 through appeal and attraction. Indeed, Madam Chair, Brisbane is Australia's New World City by appealing and attracting local residents and visitors, both interstate and international, to visit, study and live in this great city because of the quality services and enviable lifestyle that has been delivered by the LNP Administration in this Council. You just have to compare the number of Council pools, libraries and community facilities with the past Labor administrations, then you will know who is delivering for this city. I remember during the 2016 Council election when the LORD MAYOR, Graham QUIRK said, ‘any fair minded person would agree Brisbane today is better than five years ago’. I can confidently say Brisbane today is better than this time last year, and I am sure it will be even better this time next year. This budget reaffirms this Administration's resolve in investing in our social infrastructure this coming financial year. We will see nearly $10 million invested in our pools, libraries, sports fields and community facilities. That is delivering the important lifestyle improvements and community services that make our city so appealing and attractive. Madam Deputy Chair, the budget items in Program 5 set the social and cultural foundation to further foster our lifestyle and boost a stronger sense of Brisbane community. Brisbane residents come from diverse social, cultural and religious backgrounds, and the inclusive elements contained in this budget demonstrates this Administration's determination in making Brisbane a harmonious and cohesive society, and that we enjoy and appreciate the richness our diversity brings to us. Madam Deputy Chair, this city benefits enormously by the flourishing community festivals and events supported by this Council. As a Councillor, I have had the privilege of working with many community organisations in planning and delivering these welcoming local and citywide events and festivals. Madam Deputy Chair, these events and festivals not only bring artistic and cultural benefits to our city, but the economic value and the international exposure should not be underestimated. Over the past years, I have received numerous requests from overseas government and performing agencies about participating in our events and festivals. Some of these inquiries came from the Queensland Tourism and Events offices in Taipei, Hong Kong and Shanghai. Some have approached me directly. Madam Deputy Chair, this demonstrates that Brisbane's soft power is permeating into our targeted market of the Asia Pacific region. Madam Deputy Chair, in this budget $3.9 million has been allocated for festivals, which includes funding for over 70 suburban festivals across the city. These festivals allow our community to explore their creativity and showcase the local uniqueness across our city. I have to disagree with Councillor SRI. It is not how much money you are given, it is how much effort we are putting in, and what sort of result we are getting, and how effective it is. The Lord Mayor's Suburban Initiative Fund and also other funding, is to help the organisation to kick start the events, it's not to fully fund the events. This is not a big government, it is not a socialist government—we are here to help the community, not to run the events for them. Madam Deputy Chair, I cannot miss out on mentioning SunPAC in Program 5. Sunnybank Performing Arts Centre, which was the first Performing Arts Centre of its kind on the southside of Brisbane, is servicing the community organisations from across Brisbane. I can recall getting Lord Mayor's Suburban Initiative Fund applications from other parts of the city. Madam Deputy Chair, it just proves how popular SunPAC is, and does serve its purpose in providing our community organisations a suitable venue for all kinds of events. Since its opening, I've been there for concerts, dinner events, seminars, singing competitions and more. Just last week I joined the LORD MAYOR, Councillor MARX, Councillor ADAMS and Councillor SRI for Iftar dinner at SunPAC, which is the evening meal when the Muslims end

their daily Ramadan fast at sunset, Muslims break their fast at a time of the call to prayer for the evening prayer. Madam Deputy Chair, SunPAC has functioned well as a multipurpose performing theatre as it was originally designed, and is well-used and welcomed by the communities across our city. But I would like to take this opportunity to advise all Councillors in this Chamber, due to the popular demands of SunPAC, I will no longer accept Lord Mayor's Suburban Initiative Fund applications outside Macgregor Ward for costs related to SunPAC. However, I welcome Councillors to support their organisations to use SunPAC. Madam Deputy Chair, Program 5 demonstrates this Administration's commitment in providing our city with quality lifestyle and leisure opportunities. I'm honoured to work with Councillor BOURKE in the Lifestyle and Community Services portfolio in enriching the social and cultural fabric of our city. I would also like to thank all the officers who have worked professionally in delivering these services. I am proud of Program 5 and I commend it to the Chamber. Deputy Chairman: Further debate? Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING: Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chairman, in relation to this program I note that when this budget for this program was presented to the Information Session by Councillor BOURKE, he had a whole hour to present on the program. He presented for about 40 minutes on what had occurred in the 2016-17 financial year, and then in the last 90 seconds he went through a list of overheads on the raw figures for this year, and that was his presentation. So for someone like him to criticise my speech and reply to the LORD MAYOR's speech, Madam Chairman, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Madam Chairman, people in glass houses, like him, shouldn't throw stones. Madam Chairman—

Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order! Councillor CUMMING: Thank you. Also I notice if you look at the actual rules of Council, the presentation of the budget can be up to two hours, Madam Chairman, I think the LORD MAYOR only went for 40 minutes, Madam Chairman, that's only a third of his allocated time. At least I went over half my allocated time in response, Madam Chairman. So 60% beats 33% any time, 60% beats 33% any time, Madam Chairman. Councillor interjecting. Deputy Chairman: DEPUTY MAYOR! Councillor CUMMING: But of course, Madam Chair, as you know with my speeches, Madam Chair, it's quality not quantity, Madam Chair. Councillors interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: Quality not quantity, Madam Chair. Madam Chairman, yes, now in relation to Program 5, the budget for social inclusion has dropped, there's a number of significant cuts in this budget, Madam Chairman. The budget for social inclusion has dropped from $12.256 million last year, to $11.768 million. That's a drop of four per cent, but worse to come in the 2018-19 financial year, and it's expected to drop even further to $11.065 million, another six per cent, Madam Chairman. So it seems Brisbane has become less socially inclusive, or perhaps the LNP Administration doesn't rate spending budgetary funds on a social inclusiveness program.

Madam Chairman, I refer to the long list of festivals and cultural organisations which receive funds from Council. It starts on page 85 and continues on to pages 86, 87 and 88. Madam Chairman, the only problem is there are no amounts next to the names. That wasn't always the case. I can recall when this program was presented where there were actually amounts for each of the festivals, and you could check quickly to see whether groups in your organisation had had an increase or a decrease, and you could make inquiries as to why, et cetera, Madam Chairman. I think that's really important. I think it's important that there be public scrutiny given to each festival or group. For example, a festival that's given a grant of $20,000 and attracts less than 1,000 people, I would have thought they shouldn't expect to necessarily receive or continue to receive the same level of funding as a festival which is given $10,000 and which attracts 10,000 people, Madam Chairman. So I query the level of scrutiny per capita subsidy given to various festivals and, Madam Chairman, I've found in my area that we do get good value for money, because most of the festivals are organised by people who are volunteers who, an individual or a committee of volunteers, run the festivals, and this keeps costs down and maximises the attractions which can be funded, Madam Chairman. So I think greater scrutiny will mean better use of Council funds, and I believe that the claim made by Councillor BOURKE during the Information Session, that there's some Commercial-in-Confidence reason for making the grant amounts secret is spurious, Madam Chairman. As soon as you hear ‘Commercial-in-Confidence’ being used, Madam Chairman, you can tell that's grounds for a cover-up, Madam Chairman, and it's also, particularly when it's community-based organisations, it's going even further away from being anything commercial, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the other thing on page 94, I notice the Active and Healthy Parks Program is down from a budgeted $823,000 to only $728,000, which is a drop of 11.55%. Now, Madam Chairman, all I can say is obviously the QUIRK LNP Administration is not concerned about the benefits of this program, Madam Chairman. It encourages young and old to get active and get fit, and at a time of record levels of obesity, this is very important. Likewise, with Multicultural and Refugee Initiatives on page 96, the amount available for projects falls from $506,000 in last year's budget to $439,000 this year, that's a drop of 13.25% in one year. Madam Chairman, the other thing that I notice is that skate facilities, Madam Chairman, the last couple of years we've seen some expenditure on skate facilities, first time in about, I reckon, about 13 years, Madam Chairman, first time under the Liberal Administration. Lo and behold, it appears like it's going to go back to sleep again—there are no funds allocated after 2017-18, Madam Chairman. So I hope they're not going to say, ‘oh we're relying on State funding’, or something like that, Madam Chairman. What's next, Madam Chairman? They'll be saying they need State funding for park upgrades, Madam Chairman. I also refer to the Competition Grade BMX Tracks, and I see the funding has been doubled, which could be good news if there was going to be twice as many facilities provided, however it also could mean there's been a cost blowout of 100%, so I'm interested to know what's there, Madam Chairman. I've got to say, I've got great admiration for the BMX club in my area, which is the only BMX club that operates in the City of Brisbane, and it's never got major grants from Council, certainly not $600,000 per annum for three years. Instead they've had to scrape and save and get grants from their local Councillor and asphalt donated by Brisbane Asphalt to make their track viable, and well done to Wynnum BMX. If there are any other clubs formed to use the Competition Grade BMX Tracks, good luck to them as well. Madam Chairman, in relation to SunPAC, Madam Chairman, I had a look around SunPAC recently and it appears to be a fully functioning building and everything, so I'm interested to know why there's another $556,000 allocated for

this financial year, Madam Chairman. Perhaps Councillor BOURKE could comment, if it's not Commercial-in-Confidence, I suppose, on how SunPAC operates, who pays the wages for the staff—Council or does the Sunnybank Rugby Union Club make a contribution, or is a joint expense, and who receives the revenue? Because there are events being held there on a regular basis, Madam Chairman. Piano Refurbishment and Replacement, Madam Chairman, it had $576,000 allocated last year and has got another $200,000 this financial year, Madam Chairman. It does seem a large amount of money to refurbish two pianos, Madam Chairman. One of them is outside the Balmoral Room and I've been to a lot of civic receptions there over the years, and I can't recall the last time the piano was being played, Madam Chairman. So surely to spend this amount of money on a couple of pianos, they need to be played regularly to justify such large amounts of money, Madam Chairman. I doubt that this is occurring, Madam Chairman, in which case these pianos are effectively a very expensively priced piece of furniture, Madam Chairman. I do not include the piano in the main auditorium, Madam Chairman, which I understand is used on a regular basis. Madam Chairman, I also contrast the amount being spent on pianos with $85,629 allowed for the BCC contribution to bus driver security guards. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor MARX. Councillor MARX: Yes, thank you, Madam Chair, and I rise to enter the debate on budget Program 5 – Lifestyle and Community Services. I have to say, listening for the day-and-a-half here in the Chamber on the budget debate, it just gets so depressing. All you hear is just ‘give me more, give me more, give me more. We want more, it's never enough, it's never enough. But don’t make the rates too high, you make the rates too high, the fees are too high, everything's too high, but give us more money for everything else’. I seriously don’t know where it's all expected to come from. I mean, I'm just going to talk on the festivals—$3.9 million, like seriously, that's almost $4 million on festivals that we hold here in the city and out in the communities. I've got a few, okay, I know last year the Opposition, and particularly Councillor CUMMING, was extremely concerned about the fact that my Karawatha Family Fun Day funding had been cut, and yes, as I've said in this place before, unfortunately the Karawatha Ward was cut quite dramatically, in fact so much so that it no longer exists. So it would be a bit farcical to have a Karawatha Family Fun Day funding in a ward that didn't exist. So if you look at the budget book, you will see what's there—Runcorn Family Fun Day, yay. So yes, my residents in my new ward of Runcorn definitely happy to have a Family Fun Day back in Runcorn, and we're delighted for the funding, thank you very much. Sunnybank Hills State School Multi-Fest, one of largest schools in my ward, they have thousands of people come to their event. Traditionally I've funded a lot of their stuff through my LMSIF, which I was happy to continue doing when I had five schools in my ward. I now have 12, so I no longer can fund their requests nearly as much as I used to be able to, so I asked for a listing for the budget for a festival, as to join all the other ones in the book, and I was lucky enough to get that. So I'm more than happy to support them. It's not a huge amount of money, I'm guessing it's the same as what they got last year, I don’t know yet, but it's not massive amounts of money. But as Councillor HUANG said, it's about a helping hand, it's not about running it for them. Taiwanese Chamber of Commerce, they run an annual Taiwan Festival every year and they've actually got their changeover dinner this weekend, so I'll be delighted to go along and tell the new president, Simon, that again this LORD MAYOR in this budget has allocated funding for their festival. We also have the Taiwan Friendship Association, they have a festival as well, and then of course so does the Taiwanese Women's League, but that's just one

community group in my ward that splinters off into many different areas and has many different festivals in that. But it's beyond belief that we are expected to fund everything for everybody, and I just can't get over the fact that it's never enough funding for this, and it's never enough funding for that. So anyway, look I just want to say, I'm very happy with this budget. My residents are very happy with this budget. We have got millions of dollars coming out to all the different areas in the different suburbs across the whole city and I think it's an excellent budget. Thank you. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor CASSIDY. Councillor CASSIDY: Thanks very much, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on Program 5 – Lifestyle and Community Services, and will also start by congratulating a number of the local festivals in my area that have received funding once again, which is— Councillor interjecting. Councillor CASSIDY: Certainly, we'll have to wait and see how much they get, that's right Councillor CUMMING, but their hard work—those volunteer organisations which receive funding—their hard work year after year in providing some fantastic community festivals has certainly paid off in terms of being included. They include the Einbunpin Festival, which is coming up on the last Sunday in July, a great festival. I encourage everyone to come along to that one and not make it out to the Morningside Festival of course, which is on the same day. Councillor interjecting. Councillor CASSIDY: The Bluewater Festival, which celebrates the start of the Brisbane to Gladstone Yacht Race, the Christmas in Sandgate Festival which celebrates our local business district in Sandgate at Christmastime, the Music by the Sea Festival, which is about to enter its 20th anniversary, which is a really big milestone for that festival which was started by a couple of dedicated locals all that time ago who are still with the festival today, to celebrate all the great things about music, chamber music, on the northside of Brisbane. They have been successful in growing that over the years to attract a large number of international acts, as well as very notable acts from all around Australia. We do have people that come from other parts of Brisbane, Queensland and around Australia to see some of the acts that are attracted to the Music by the Sea Festival. They also have their ongoing monthly concerts as well. The Sandcliffe Writers Festival, which this year had events both in Sandgate and Bracken Ridge this year, and they have a literary dinner each year as part of that festival. Last year Kristina Olsen, a great Brisbane author, was the guest of honour there. This year was Matthew Condon and he spoke about the trilogy that he has spent the best part of the last five years compiling around the trials and tribulations of the Joh era in Queensland. It was a very illuminating dinner, considering the events that were the week following about to unfold, about to unfold in terms of the McCulkin case. So it's a fantastic local festival that gets a small amount of funding, but those volunteers that use that funding certainly do really great things. On the multicultural festivals, the South Pacific Islanders Christmas Celebrations that happen each Christmas, which bring the broader community together, not only the South Pacific Islander community on the northside of Brisbane, but the whole community together, and the Zillmere Festival, which has gone through different iterations in its time, and is going from strength to strength and will be coming up very soon. I do note, however, that unfortunately one of the large festivals that Brisbane City Council has funded for a while, the Asia Pacific Film Festival, dropped off. That poor festival, I think, was struggling along, and this was one of the key signature city festivals which was aimed, I suppose, at providing Brisbane a really high profile event to attract tourism and dollars from our

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 248 region in which we're in. It's certainly sad to see that that festival, which was a Brisbane City Council festival, can't keep going unfortunately, Madam Chairman. There are a couple of other festivals I'd like to touch on, which I included in my budget submission to the LORD MAYOR for this area of the budget, and that's the Greek Affair Multicultural Festival at the grounds of the Parish of St Paraskevi on the northside of Brisbane at Taigum. They have a fantastic, probably not to the scale of Paniyiri of course, but it's a big festival on the northside, nonetheless, for the Greek community, and they also work very hard at embracing all cultures of the northside of Brisbane and bringing them together on that day. They are supported through the Deagon Ward Lord Mayor's Suburban Initiative Fund each year, and we certainly advocate for their inclusion in future budgets, as well as the Sandgate Sunset Run, a unique community running festival that happens in Sandgate in each year, which again, attracts people from not only our city to come down to our local area, but also last year it attracted Olympic runners, runners who had represented Australia in marathons at the previous Olympic Games. So it's certainly a great thing for tourism in Brisbane, and I would certainly encourage Councillor BOURKE and the LORD MAYOR to have a look at those for a future budget, Madam Chair. On to pools, it is great to see that the long-awaited Sandgate Pool refurbishment and upgrade is still on the table, which the funding has been for some years, and I've been on record in this place talking about that on a number of occasions. Locals have waited over half a decade now since that being first announced to see that, and we are seeing some work happening there now with the children's aquatic play area upgrade. That certainly stirred up a bit of debate in the community around what's happening with the broader pool upgrade, and I certainly do think it's great that the funding is on the table and the commitment is still there by the lessee, who has essentially had to put his small business on hold at that location through this difficult time, so it's great to see that the commitment is still there, Madam Chairman. In that sort of area, we talk about the Access and Inclusion Plan, it's something I have raised before and certainly seek to work with Councillor BOURKE going forward, and also our parks team, in seeing some better disability access, toilets installed, which comply with the Disability and Discrimination Act, on the northside of Brisbane, apart from—and I'm talking the whole of the northside, north of the river there, there are very few locations where there are toilet facilities with full adult change facilities. I have a number of people in the community who like to come down to the Sandgate and Brighton Foreshore area to use those facilities, and now we've got some, through community partnerships and 50/50 funding with Council and community organisations, ongoing investment in Arthur Davis Park there, with all-ability play equipment. So we're encouraging more and more families with children, older children with disabilities, to be able to come down and enjoy those facilities, so to see a roll out of some further disability access, toilets, would be fantastic, and I certainly look forward to working with Councillor BOURKE with that. Just picking up on a point that Councillor SRI raised in terms of our Public Space Liaison Officers and support for homeless people living in Brisbane, there are only two Public Space Liaison Officers for the whole City of Brisbane, and while a lot of their time is spent obviously in the inner city and couple of kilometre ring, I suppose, around the CBD, they do come out and do work in my ward, being the end of a train line, having a lot of safe and out of the way places, I suppose, where people who are, for a variety of reasons, finding themselves sleeping rough. My area does certainly have a large population of people who do sleep rough. So those Public Space Liaison Officers are coming out to my community and doing fantastic work. I'd like to place on record my admiration and thanks to them for their hard work, but would certainly think with a program area, Program 5 – Lifestyle and Community Services, has nearly 530 full-time equivalent staff alone in this

program area, and we have only 8,000 employees in the Brisbane City Council more generally, that an investment in this area over and above the two Public Space Liaison Officers that we currently have, would be a very wise investment. There are over 100,000 homeless people in Australia, and particularly in this program area when we talk about engaging with our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders communities, this is very much tied together, considering that 25% of homeless people are Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people, and as a proportion of the population, that's a very, very bad statistic. With the Council the size of Brisbane, I'd certainly think we should be punching above our weight, rather than just scraping along. The two Public Space Liaison Officers we have do fantastic work, but they only do 80 hours a week between the two of them, Madam Chair. So what I would love to see is a discussion around how we can better resource that area of the budget, and it's certainly something we should do better on. Finally, just picking up on the Leader of the Opposition's comments about skate facilities, there is capital this year and one of those skate facilities which was talked about in the Budget Information Sessions was the skate facilities being currently funded out of the Morningside Ward Parks and Footpath Trust Fund at Balmoral, Madam Chair. So I certainly hope that that community might be getting a little extra on top of that funding, Madam Chair. Chairman: Councillor CASSIDY, your time has expired. Further debate? Councillor KING. Councillor KING: Thank you Madam Chair. I rise in support of Program 5, and I would like to thank Councillor BOURKE and his team and the LORD MAYOR, because this is the fun part of the budget. This is where it's all happened, and I must also congratulate, I think this is the first time I've ever heard Councillor CASSIDY get up and do a positive speech about something in the budget. Not once did we hear about pork-barrelling, because he's got more fairs than probably anyone, or Councillor SUTTON, across the wards—and who would begrudge that, because Sandgate Foreshore is a beautiful part of our city. Madam Chair, I would also like to say to Councillor COOPER, you don't have to be envious of the Chermside Library anymore, because I see the Bracken Ridge Library is finally getting its update, and I'm sure you're looking forward to that. I'm also really looking forward to, and I thank the hardworking library staff, because most of you know, I see a lot of them all of the time, and they certainly work extremely hard for the visitors to the library. Of course Marchant Ward has two of the best libraries, I may be a little bit biased, but the Chermside Library, and of course the beautiful community hub of the Grange Library. So I'm delighted to see the extended hours for the Grange Library, so I thank you very much for library staff for that. I'd also like to thank our hardworking Public Space Liaison Officers. They do a fabulous job going out and monitoring our homeless, and also trying to catch those people that haven't been homeless for long and try and put them back into the community with shelter and everything else that they do. So thank you very much to those Council officers. I'd also like to just say again, I love the fact of Homeless Connect. I love the fact that a lot of our Council officers give up their time to come in and volunteer at Homeless Connect. It is a great service for our homeless or at risk homeless people of our city. I love the fact that it's like a shopping experience sometimes, and the beautiful breakfast and whatever that you can have at Homeless Connect, the haircut and the hairdressers, the dental and all the medical people that come in and give up their time to help our homeless, or at risk homeless people across our city. Marchant Ward has one fair, so I would like to talk about that one, the Lanham May Fair at Grange, and thank all the community, because this is truly

a community-based event. All our not-for-profits, all our kindies and Scouts and sporting groups all come together to fundraise for their individual groups. I'd like to have a big thank you to Inner North Rotary for their assistance over the last few years. Without their assistance, I'm sure the fair would not be the success it is, and it keeps on growing from year to year. There is a fair just across the border in Councillor WYNDHAM's area so I might claim that one. The Multicultural Taste of the World, I'd really like to thank the Malayalee Association for all their hard work. That multicultural festival certainly pulls from different cultures not just on the northside of Brisbane, but also across Brisbane greater itself. It is the most magical day, isn't it, Councillor WYNDHAM? So many people come through that festival, especially for the fireworks in the evening. So thank you very much to that organisation for continuing the Multicultural Taste of the World, Festival. Again, in closing, I'd like to thank Councillor BOURKE for this wonderful program and all the excitement and festivals across our great city. Thank you. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor BOURKE would you like to sum up? Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, look it's a pleasure to actually be here and have the opportunity close on Program 5. Madam Chairman, just before I get to rebutting some of the comments that have been made, I just want to take this opportunity to thank my Divisional Manager, Paul Salvati, to my Branch Managers, and this is quite a large program, Madam Chairman, so to Keirstyn, Miriam, Sharan and Kent, thank you very much for all that you do in our city. To all of the team that help put together the budget information and the budget, can I thank all of those Council officers as well, and also to Jock, Anthony and Sue in my office for all the support and help that they've given me. Madam Chairman, Program 5 delivers lifestyle and leisure opportunities for our city, and I thank Councillor KING for her contribution to the debate and the positive nature in which she's embraced Program 5, and all the wonderful elements that sit there within, Madam Chairman. But some of the comments from those opposite are a little bit disturbing, and I'm going to start, Madam Chairman, with Councillor SRI, because he was the first speaker on the other side. So Councillor SRI obviously thinks that he has got the solution and the answer to all the problems in the world, that he is now a pseudo property developer and property real estate agent as well, Madam Chairman. If only I'd sat down with Councillor SRI, I would have been able to find that commercial property to facilitate the Creative Hub in West End, Madam Chairman. Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Point of order against you, Councillor BOURKE. Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Claim to be misrepresented. Chairman: Councillor BOURKE. Councillor BOURKE: Beautiful thing, Hansard. So, Madam Chairman, the record will show Councillor SRI said, ‘if Councillor BOURKE had sat down with me and talked, we would have helped find a location’. Well, Madam Chairman, we've been working through finding a suitable location to provide this facility for the creative businesses and creative individuals in the West End peninsula, Madam Chairman. Councillor interjecting. Councillor BOURKE: Well I wouldn't take that interjection, Councillor SCHRINNER, but look, we're working through that and we've identified a location, Madam Chairman, and we will no doubt soon be announcing said location.

Madam Chairman, he then turned his efforts to the West End Library and the need for public toilets there. It is a heritage-listed building, it is one of our smallest libraries, Madam Chairman, there is nowhere inside the library, unless he wants me to take away space for books and facilities that's currently sitting inside the library to put in a toilet, for a toilet to go, Madam Chairman. This ludicrous idea and proposition that he keeps putting forward of letting members of the public into the secure space where our Council staff are, through the workroom and lunchroom into the toilet that the Council staff use, is just ludicrous, Madam Chairman. This Council— Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chair. Chairman: Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Claim to be misrepresented. Chairman: Thank you. Councillor BOURKE: He said, he said, ‘why can't they go into the toilet that the staff use’, so, Madam Chairman, the toilet that the staff use at West End Library is in the workroom, it is a behind a secure point. Our staff deserve to have security, they deserve to be safe in their workplace, Madam Chairman. So I just, look, Councillor SRI, put it in your budget submission, happy to talk to you about it, but trying to put our staff at risk is really drawing a long bow. Madam Chairman, we then turn to Councillor CUMMING who has spent more time over the last two days debating the length or shortness of his own speech in this place than any other point inside the budget, Madam Chairman. He made these grand assertions about festivals. He stood up and he said, ‘there used to be a time when festivals were listed out in the budget book, Madam Chairman, where we used to see the amounts, they were all there for everyone to see’. Well, Madam Chairman, I thought maybe Councillor CUMMING was talking about when he and his Labor Party colleagues last held the financial reins in this Council. I was thinking maybe that would be the pinnacle, the bible that he's talking about, where all the information was that. So, Madam Chairman, I quickly grabbed my copies of the 2001 to 2004 budget books, the last time the Labor Party held the reins in this place, Madam Chairman, and guess what? There's no list, there's nothing, there's zip, zilch, zero when it comes to detail in here, Madam Chairman, in terms of listing out the festivals. I mean, Madam Chairman, they're hardly even a book, like you could almost read this in about two minutes. It is a glossy brochure. So, Councillor CUMMING, well done, you claim, pontificate and claim all these wild assertions in this place, but when you had the power, when you and your Labor mates were in power here, you couldn't even get that list, you couldn't even list out the names of the festivals that you were funding, let alone the amounts. Very quiet over there now, Madam Chairman, they don't like the hard truth, they don’t like the history, because they like to make these assertions and claims in this place, but they forget the history, Madam Chairman, when it comes to this place as well. Madam Chairman, Councillor CUMMING then went on to talk about 5.4 and the supposed cuts, and always when the Labor Party talks about cuts, Madam Chairman, you have to look a little bit deeper just to see, deeper into their claims, Madam Chairman, just to see what's actually happening. So, Madam Chairman, for those of you who have read the budget book and those of you who came to the Information Session, which was Councillor CUMMING as well, he was at the Information Session, we talked about the changes in Program 5 and Program 6, and the former Program 7, Madam Chairman, and money had moved round. I explained that money had moved around and Councillor CUMMING, through you, Madam Chairman, 5.4 Social Inclusion is one of those places where money has moved from one program to another part of the program area. So there is no cut. You know, you can stand up and make all these assertions, but there is no cut, Councillor CUMMING, the program has been rearranged. I went through those

for you at the very start of the Information Session, for you to actually try and help you understand those. Madam Chairman, Councillor CUMMING then raised the Active Parks Program. Well, Madam Chairman, we've got 58,000 participants who were part of it in 2016-17. In 2015-16, there was 52,000, and this year's budget allocation will continue to see growth in those numbers of participants, Madam Chairman. The Labor Party seem to think that you need to throw money at things to make them better, Madam Chairman. Efficient, effective running, engaging the right contractors, having the right programs, Madam Chairman, and communicating that to people will see growth in numbers. It's not just a matter of the Labor Party way at State, Federal and here in Council —throw money at a problem or throw money at an issue and it instantaneously will get better, apparently. Well, Madam Chairman, we on this side are a lot more responsible in the way that we manage finances in this city and the way that we use ratepayers' money. Madam Chairman, SunPAC. What can I say about SunPAC? It is a fantastic institution. It is being so well embraced by the communities across this city, not just on the southside, but right across this city, Madam Chairman. Councillor CUMMING stood up and went, ‘this $580,000 in here, what's that for?’ Well, Madam Chairman, he asked me that question in the Budget Information Sessions and I gave him the answer in the Budget Information Session. I don't know whether he wasn't listening or he didn't understand my answer, but Madam Chairman, SunPAC is a joint venture between ourselves and Sunnybank Rugby Union. There is a board that is set up. They have their own management structure, they have staff, they engage or they provide services to groups that wish to book it. They take the money, Madam Chairman. They then use that money to then put on events as well. Council has an ongoing community service obligation with SunPAC to help support community groups and organisations to use the facility, Madam Chairman. Because there is a cost to using a facility, like there is a cost to using this facility or any of our facilities, and we continue to support those community groups, Madam Chairman, with that allocation. I provided that answer to Councillor CUMMING in the presentation that we did, Madam Chairman, which was quite detailed. We went through everything that is happening, Madam Chairman. There were some fantastic questions, Madam Chairman, from—I have to say from the LNP Councillors, but there were some fantastic questions that really got to some of the key issues the Councillors saw in this particular part of the budget. So Madam Chairman, in Program 5, as Councillor KING said, is where all the fun stuff happens in the Council budget. Infrastructure is important, Madam Chairman, public transport is important. I have to be very careful here, Madam Chairman, Councillor COOPER is muttering to my left. These are important things, but the fun things—the libraries, the pools, all of our entertainment programs, our festivals and events, all happen here in Program 5, Madam Chairman. It is the fun part of what we do. It's where there's lots of free stuff for people as well, Madam Chairman, and I commend Program 5 to the Council Chamber. Chairman: Councillor SRI, you had two items of misrepresentation? Councillor SRI: Thank you, Madam Chair. Councillor BOURKE seemed not quite to hear what I was saying. My point was that if he was allowing his officers to work with me more constructively, I would have been able to help him identify existing creative hubs that are already operating well in the community and could partner with Council. My second point of misrepresentation—I can't even remember what it was now. I felt pretty aggrieved at the time but since it's slipped my mind now I won't take up the meeting's time.

Chairman: Thank you. I will now put Program 5.

Motion put: The Chairman submitted to the Chamber the motion for the adoption of the Lifestyle and Community Services Program and it was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillor Matthew BOURKE, and Councillor Andrew WINES immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.

The Chairman then called upon Councillor Matthew BOURKE to present the Customer Service Program.

6. CUSTOMER SERVICE PROGRAM: 665/2016-17 Councillor Matthew BOURKE, Chairman of the Lifestyle and Community Services Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Andrew WINES, that for the services of the Council, the allocations for the Operations and the Projects for the year 2017-18 and the Rolling Projects for the Customer Service Program as contained on pages 109 to 119 so far as they relate to Program 6, be adopted.

Chairman: Councillor BOURKE. Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I just want to start by thanking all of the staff that are involved in Program 6, in particular my Divisional Manager Paul Salvati, as well as Branch Managers Shane Hackett, Sean Hodgson and acting for Sean, Elizabeth Sisson. Program 6 is the bring together of the old Program 5 and the old Program 7, Madam Chairman, and it where our customer service and the way that we engage with the people and residents of our city really is front and centre and the focus. It contains our business hotline, that 133-BNE number, Madam Chairman, as well as our fantastic award-winning, internationally-recognised Customer Call Centre, Madam Chairman. I want to take this opportunity also to acknowledge and thank all of the consultants who dealt with over eight million contacts through multiple different channels in the 2016-17 financial year, Madam Chairman, in the professional way and the courteous way that they engage with those residents, businesses and visitors to our city, and the way that they were able to help resolve and take care of all the people in our city, Madam Chairman. It also brings together, Madam Chairman, as I said, the old Program 7, Madam Chairman, so it takes care of important things like the way that we manage and deal with invasive species across our city. It also, Madam Chairman, ensures that people are being responsible pet owners and encourages and runs a range of programs, programs like BARCC (Brisbane’s

Active Registration Compliance Campaign) and FIDO (Find Irresponsible Dog Owners Campaign), Madam Chairman, where we help support pet owners across our city to be more responsible. It also, Madam Chairman, takes care of our fantastic Eat Safe. This is and has been an award-winning program, Madam Chairman, picked up by numerous councils right across the southeast corner of Queensland and indeed now going further afield across our country of Australia, Madam Chairman. It is a wonderful program that it gives confidence to people who are dining out in our city about the quality, about the food safety handling techniques that is being undertaken in the preparation of their meals. It continues to go from strength to strength, Madam Chairman, and we continue in the 2017-18 Budget to invest in engaging with multicultural communities across our city, to make sure that they are getting information as part of our Eat Safe Program in easy-to-understand fact sheets. Chairman: Sorry, Councillor BOURKE.

EXPIRATION OF PERIOD FOR DEBATE OF BUDGET PROGRAMS (5PM)

At that point, the Chairman advised as the time had reached 5pm, the period allowed for debate of budget programs had expired.

Chairman: Under the provisions of section 74(6) of the Meetings Local Law, on the expiration of the period allowed for debate of budget programs (or the extended period allowed by Council resolution), I shall now put the motions to the meeting for the adoption of the following without further amendment or debate: (a) every budget program not yet debated; and (b) every budget program debated but not yet voted upon; and (c) every budget program partially debated and voted upon. So I will put the motion for Program 6, the Customer Service Program.

Councillor SUTTON: Point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Point of order, Councillor SUTTON. Seriatim – Budget Programs 6 to 8 and Business and Council Providers Councillor Shayne SUTTON requested that Budget Programs 6, 7, 8 and Business and Council Providers, be taken seriatim for voting purposes.

Chairman: I will put each budget program individually for you, that's no problem at all.

Motion put: The Chairman submitted to the Chamber the motion for the adoption of the Customer Service Program and it was declared carried on the voices.

7. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM: 666/2016-17 Chairman: I will now put the motion for the adoption of Program 7, the Economic Development Program.

Motion put: The Chairman submitted to the Chamber the motion for the adoption of the Economic Development Program and it was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillor Andrew WINES, and Councillor Shayne SUTTON immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.

AYES: 20 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES, and Norm WYNDHAM.

NOES: 6 - The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK, Shayne SUTTON, and Jonathan SRI.

8. CITY GOVERNANCE PROGRAM: 667/2016-17 Chairman: I will now put the motion for the adoption of Program 8, the City Governance Program.

Motion put: The Chairman submitted to the Chamber the motion for the adoption of the City Governance Program and it was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillor Andrew WINES, and the LORD MAYOR immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being declared carried.

AYES: 20 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES, and Norm WYNDHAM.

NOES: 6 - The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK, Shayne SUTTON, and Jonathan SRI.

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 256 BUSINESSES AND COUNCIL PROVIDERS: 668/2016-17 Chairman: I will now put the motion for the adoption of the Businesses and Council Providers.

Motion put: The Chairman submitted to the Chamber the motion for the adoption of the Business and Council Providers and it was declared carried on the voices.

That concluded the consideration of the Programs and the Businesses and Council Providers, and the Chairman therefore called on the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK) to move a motion for the adoption of the budget.

ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2017-18: File No. 134/135/86/270 669/2016-17 The LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, moved, seconded by Councillor Krista ADAMS, that:

Council adopt the Annual Plan and Budget contained in the 2017-18 Annual Plan and Budget document comprising:-

(a) The Budgeted Financial Statements, including the Budgeted Summary of Recommendations, the Budgeted Statement of Comprehensive Income (income and expenditure), the Budgeted Statement of Financial Position, the Budgeted Statement of Cash Flows, the Budgeted Summary of Recommendations – Long Term Financial Forecast and the Budgeted Statement of Financial Ratios and the Revenue Policy and Revenue Statement outlined on pages 7 to 13 of the Annual Plan and Budget Document.

(b) The adopted Budget Programs for Programs 1 to 8 and the Businesses and Council Providers.

(c) The rates and charges as set out in the Resolution of Rates and Charges on pages 219 to 273 of the Annual Plan and Budget Document.

(d) The Fees and Charges as specified in the document entitled Schedule of Fees and Charges tabled.

(e) On page 61of the Schedule of Fees and Charges, adjacent to ‘Mobile food vendor in BCC parkland’ fee: In the column “Unit” insert “Each vendor each year (single or multiple sites, one or more parks)”;In

the column “Base Charge” insert “$207.77”; In the column “GST” insert “$20.78”; In the column “Final Charge” insert “$228.55.

Chairman: LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR: Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I at the outset, just want to thank all Councillors for their involvement in this debate over the last week or so, not only through the Information Sessions, but the last two days debating the programs individually. I also take this opportunity at the very start to thank all of those officers that have been involved in the formulation of the budget, and in advance we thank them for the work that they will do as they roll out the expenditures contained in this budget over the next year. I thank of course Councillor Krista ADAMS, as the Chairman of Finance, for her role in assisting me greatly in putting this budget together in the months leading up to this budget. It's an infrastructure budget, Madam Chairman, but one which also looks very much at the lifestyle of our city, and one which also focuses on economic prosperity in Brisbane. Each and every year, it is always a balancing act, Madam Chairman, the many demands of a city. We've heard many of those demands over the last couple of days. There is always a significant number of projects that would be great to have in our city, Madam Chairman. We have to balance that against the affordability of the ratepayers of our city to pay. Madam Chairman, what we have tried to do in each and every budget, as we have with this one, is to develop a budget that advances the city, that makes sure that we continue to progress as a New World City, and so it is with this budget. It's a budget which of course at the heart of it has $1 billion of infrastructure spend, has $655 million on public and active transport, including of course $123 million toward the operating costs of that transport, and a $50 million first instalment on the Metro. It's a budget that attributes $583 million towards being a clean, green and sustainable city, and one that has $441 million for economic development, and $307 million in the leisure and lifestyle opportunities. Madam Chairman, it is a budget which has seen an increase in rates of 2.4%, and again we have endeavoured to keep that rate down as low as we possibly can. It reflects an annual increase of around $37. Madam Chairman, commercial rates equally are on average at 2.4%, together with fees and charges and waste services at that same percentage. Madam Chairman, Brisbane of course, continues to have the lowest minimum rates in South East Queensland by a fair margin, and we have those lowest minimum rates before you add on the increases that will invariably come with other councils throughout South East Queensland as they roll out their budgets for this year. Madam Chairman, obviously, when we talk about infrastructure—the highlighted projects for Kingsford Smith Drive, $223 million in this budget, with Telegraph Road at $81 million, Wynnum Road with $30 million and ICB at $10 million. But it also includes 39 major projects and 250 minor projects in the budget, as well as $90 million of funds towards the surfacing of streets—large ones, short ones, all sorts of ones, as we've heard during the course of the debate. So Madam Chairman, $650 million in all. That number will vary. It was about $400 million last year, I think, but Madam Chairman, that number will vary. The important thing is though that the financial contribution towards that program remains firm at $90 million a year as committed. Madam Chairman, the budget is one which, as I say, contains a lot of interesting aspects to it. Some of the things that we haven't really debated in a great deal of

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017] 258 depth in the budget—there are small priced items. I refer Madam Chairman, to the fact that the budget will also roll out free Wi-Fi in the CBD at Wynnum. It will roll it out also in Hawken Drive at St Lucia. That will be a great addition. A couple of days ago I was able to give an announcement around the $555,000 renewing some of the artwork from Expo 88. Now, it's a trip down memory lane, a bit of nostalgia, as someone I think might have referred to it in the Chamber, but Madam Chairman, it's much more than that. It does reflect a turning point in this city and the attitude of the people of our city. It was the growing up of our city, and I think it ought to be recognised and celebrated, and more importantly though, the artwork themselves will add to the value and interest in the city. Interesting points that people will come across, Madam Chairman, as they walk through the city. That's important, and I'm hoping, Madam Chairman, that over time these pieces will not only just be CBD-related, but also across the city. Expo 88 is something that, Madam Chairman, I'd say was a game-changer. We, Madam Chairman, also see in this budget four new outdoor gyms at $1.7 million. I think that's another good addition to the suburbs of the city. The commitment to Mt Coot-tha, to advancing the bigger vision for that well-loved landmark in our city. I don't think there would be anybody in this city that hasn't had a trip to Mt Coot-tha at some stage, in some form, for some purpose, Madam Chairman, and that the lookout and the summit and the various aspects of Mt Coot-tha, Madam Chairman, will be a new opportunity for the residents of this city to continue to enjoy the life of their city. Madam Chairman, the budget is one which of course is comprehensive in terms of the various aspects of city life, whether it's the festivals, whether it is the parks and gardens, the new additions to them and the maintenance of them, Madam Chairman. We've continued to invest in the drainage systems of this city, and I would just make this point. There was some debate around drainage works. It needs to be remembered that this city government had a very significant cost associated with the rollout of studies from the Flood Commission of Inquiry. I just want to say to you all that it's my intention that as we now move away from those financial commitments associated with that, that we can beef up to a greater degree in future years the monies associated with drainage, Madam Chairman. It has been a source of some frustration to me that we have had to invest as much as we have within the study. There is good reason for that but, Madam Chairman, I am a person who likes to see the money spent on the ground, rather than getting caught up in the studies. I accept, Madam Chairman, that when these inquiries come along it's important that we are true to them, Madam Chairman, and so we have done that. But we will continue, I think, from now on to see more money rolled out in that direction. Madam Chairman, the budget I believe is a well-balanced budget. Well, it's certainly a balanced budget, but it's a budget which makes sure that the commitments to loan borrowing in the future are also reduced on where we thought they might be last year. It keeps our financial position in a very strong position, one, Madam Chairman, which I am sure will retain our credit rating as strong. And, Madam Chairman, I think that that is something that we obviously need to continue to do, progress the city, make sure we're doing the things that the people of this city want in terms of infrastructure build, but at the same time make sure that we don't leave a burden for future generations. It's in that same vein, and it's not something we've debated much over the last couple of days, but underpinning and underlying this budget, Madam Chairman, is a continued growth towards asset maintenance in our city. If there's one thing that I am determined to do, it is to make sure that we don't leave major burdens of costs to future generations, and that while we build, and we like to talk about new things, it is so important that we invest in the things that we already have,

the $23 billion of assets that this city, as a city entity and government, now holds on behalf of the people of this city. So, Madam Chairman, it is with those words that I am very, very pleased to be able to present the budget and to endorse the budget for the Chamber. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING: Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, people are doing it tough all around Brisbane, Madam Chair. Residents tell me that rising bills and stagnant wages make keeping their head above water a daily struggle. Yet this budget from an increasingly out-of-touch, tired Administration has effectively delivered a pay cut to the residents of 111 Brisbane suburbs, whose rates will rise more than their wages do, more than CPI (Consumer Price Index). This budget is Graham QUIRK's great pay cut for people in 111 suburbs across Brisbane. Why is LORD MAYOR QUIRK pursuing this attack on household budgets? Why are rates climbing when the revenue base is ever-expanding? Why didn't this LNP Administration follow the lead of the Gold Coast who kept average rate rises down to 1.8%, in line with CPI and wages growth? If the Gold Coast can do it with the Commonwealth Games, why can't Brisbane? It's because this clapped out Administration has lost touch with what ordinary people expect in tough times. Households have been forced to cut back on luxuries and they expect their Council to do the same. Brisbane residents know it's the wrong time to splurge $555,000 on two Expo artworks when we already own 20 or so. They know it's wrong to spend $200,000 refurbishing two City Hall pianos. They know it's folly to throw away hundreds of thousands of dollars on a study for an Olympics we can't afford. Compare this largesse to the comparatively miserly $85,000 to be spent on security guards to protect our bus drivers. Compare the cuts to pensioner water rebates to the $100 million dividend the Council receives as 85% owner of Queensland Urban Utilities. Where are the QUIRK Administration's priorities? Madam Chair, in suburbs like Inala, where people know how to make the most of every dollar, rates will outstrip CPI and wages growth by more than three times. More than triple. It's the last thing they need. Rates in Inala have skyrocketed to gold-plate Kingsford Smith Drive and expensive traffic bottlenecks right across the city. Those Inala residents are also copping what the LORD MAYOR himself described as financial pain associated with the so-called Metro, but for them there's no gain in either of these projects. Madam Chair, the best that can be said for the latest version of the so-called Metro is that it's not the ill-conceived initial version. Councillors will recall the Mayor and his Transport Chair trumpeting the fact there was nothing like it in Australia. Was it any wonder? Who would want one? The latest Metro-light is at least a step in the right direction. The new route adopts Labor's proposal to connect the city to UQ and West End. We have given our support for the greening of the Victoria Bridge, but with major misgivings about other aspects of Metro-light. It doesn't address bus congestion, and it doesn't address capacity issues for residents in the eastern and northern suburbs. Ratepayers I speak to are concerned. They know the State and Federal Governments won't contribute, and the $330 million black hole on Metro will go straight to rates. They know they're in for skyrocketing rates as construction builds start rolling in. While we're on buses, I note that each year this Council tells the media they are buying 60 new buses. What they don't tell the people of Brisbane is how many buses are being retired. This year it's 50, so the net gain to the fleet is only 10. It's typical of the spin this Administration cranks out every day through their $2 million PR team. Madam Chair, ratepayers are telling me they're getting sick of it. They can see past PR, like the so-called $1 billion congestion plan. That was such a snow job

it belongs at the Winter Festival outside in King George Square. Well, that snow melted with the first question Labor asked in the Infrastructure Information Session. Under questioning from Labor, Councillor COOPER had to reveal the $1 billion included $185.4 million in carryovers—projects promised this financial year but not delivered. That's right, the Council is supposedly so concerned about congestion, it didn't get around to spending $185.4 million earmarked for just that purpose in this year's budget. Last week the LORD MAYOR said, and I quote, ‘if we don't keep the infrastructure build up you get more and more delays out on the road network’. His words, yet they failed to spend $185.4 million that could have alleviated congestion right across Brisbane. It doesn't add up. If they couldn't spend this year's allocation, what are the odds of them spending more than $1 billion next year? Councillor SUTTON, has anyone taken up your offer of a bet yet? I bet you they haven't. Madam Chair, Labor welcomes the long overdue funding allocated to the Wynnum Road upgrade, with 56,000 vehicles funnelling through this busy corridor each day and the peak-hour crawl down to 25 kilometres per hour, this is a much-needed project. But the inconvenient truth is that it will be eight years late when it finally opens. Under the LNP's 2008 Transport Plan released by the Chair, Councillor QUIRK, Wynnum Road and Kingsford Drive were to be finalised by 2012. It seems Wynnum Road isn't the city's worst bottleneck. The worst bottleneck is in the LORD MAYOR's Office. Madam Chair, the budget will be bolstered by somewhere in the vicinity of $25 million in traffic fines, and a further $21.3 million from parking meters. LORD MAYOR QUIRK is also banking on another $1 million in improved enforcement technology. Under orders from this Administration, parking officers will sweat on people who overstay the time limit. Motorists will pay a fine the second their meter expires. The lengths parking officers must go so they can reach their revenue targets is getting out of hand. I was interested to read just this week of a Graceville resident in Councillor JOHNSTON's ward getting a ticket at 10.45 at night because his car was a few centimetres across his driveway in a suburban street with no signs and no meters. Is it any wonder residents consider this blatant revenue raising and nothing more? Madam Chairman, the residents of the 111 suburbs in which rates are rising above wages are not the only people who are going to be hurt by this budget. On page 185 of the budget document it shows Field Services employees cost to fall almost $1 million, from $130.79 million to $129.83 million between this financial year and 2017-18. Given Council has tabled a 2.5% pay rise offer during EBA9 negotiations, shouldn't this figure be rising instead of falling? Or does the Council intend to axe frontline jobs and give the work to contractors? Madam Chair, these are just a few of the questions that demand an answer for the people of Brisbane. Rest assured, when Council resumes there will be a whole lot more from us. Go the Maroons in Game 3! Chairman: Further debate? Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. While it's not without its positive elements, this budget overall is a backwards-looking, missed opportunity. It overspends on major road-widening projects and underspends on essential local infrastructure, including pedestrian crossings, drainage and public transport, and also fails to sufficiently increase funding for community services and programs that improve sustainability and enrich residents' quality of life. To begin with, let's talk about transport. I'm still waiting for more details regarding some pretty significant concerns I have about the Brisbane Metro

project. I certainly see the logic of redesigning Victoria Bridge and the Cultural Centre station to reduce bottlenecks, but the way LNP Councillors talk about Brisbane Metro, anyone would think it's some massive, transformative project that's going to revolutionise Brisbane's transport network. But it's not really a new mass rapid transit system in the way that term is ordinarily understood. It's larger-capacity buses on an existing bus corridor, with some efficiency gains in terms of station and bridge redesigns. Council's total projected spend over the next three years is not much more than $200 million. This year it's less than $50 million. That compares extremely poorly to the hundreds of millions of dollars that they are spending every year on road information upgrades and maintenance. So maybe it is a good project, but it falls far short of what's necessary. Meanwhile, suburbs like Kangaroo Point and East Brisbane, so close to the CBD, still don't have high-frequency bus routes to connect to nearby hubs. You're up-zoning and densifying the inner city, but you're still encouraging all those residents to drive by failing to provide reliable bus services. Well over $650 million has been sunk on the widening of Kingsford Smith Drive, and the word on the ground is that project costs and timeframes are blowing out and contractors will have to cut corners in order to stay within budget. More than $115 million is being frittered away to widen a 700-metre stretch of Lytton Road in East Brisbane, plus millions more on other road projects that will continue to prioritise private motor vehicles ahead of pedestrians, bikes and public transport. Transit lanes cost comparatively little to install. Lowering speed limits is extremely cheap. These sorts of changes, which can reduce bus travel times and improve pedestrian safety and comfort, would save Council hundreds of millions of dollars, not to mention the savings, and more importantly, the social benefits that lowered speed limits deliver in terms of reducing serious accidents and hospitalisations. If Council is concerned that motorists from other regions and council areas are driving up congestion, why not spend some real money developing major public transport hubs on the northern and southern boundaries of the Brisbane local government area, rather than falling back on regressive 1950s traffic planning strategies. You've said you don't want Brisbane to replicate the mistakes of sprawling, car-dependent cities like Los Angeles, and you are rapidly densifying the inner city in response to pressure from profit-hungry developers, but your transport spending priorities are completely undermining the potential benefits of densification and are encouraging and reinforcing car-dependent suburban sprawl. Some Councillors have mistakenly suggested that by arguing for more spending on public and active transport and less on private motor vehicles, I'm saying that we should force people out of their cars, but actually it's this City Council which is forcing people into cars by failing to provide practical alternatives. You are denying residents a choice and saying that they have to drive if they want to get around, particularly in the outer suburbs. You are forcing low-income residents to take on the significant financial burden of private vehicle ownership by designing neighbourhoods that are very difficult to navigate if you don't own a car. Where's the money for footpaths, for pedestrian crossings? Stories that mobility-impaired residents in Brisbane's middle suburbs can't even get to the local bus stop due to inadequate or non-existent footpaths, make a mockery of Brisbane's claim to be a New World City. When residents tell me they're driving their kids to a school less than a kilometre away because there aren't safe pedestrian crossings, it’s pretty clear that our spending priorities are backwards. The BCC's lack of spending on bike lanes is also extremely reprehensible and borders on criminally negligent. Councillors interjecting.

Councillor SRI: If I'm really generous and I include the short stretches of separated bike lanes that are delivered as part of major road projects, $40 million or $50 million for bikes per year still looks negligible in the context of a $3 billion budget. How many more cyclists will die on our roads before your priorities shift? Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Point of order against you, Councillor SRI. Councillor WINES. Councillor WINES: Would Councillor SRI take a question? Chairman: Councillor SRI? Councillor SRI: No, I've got limited time and unfortunately you always cap debate. I applaud the continued allocation of funding for the Woolloongabba Bikeway Project. Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order, order! Councillor SRI: But I note that the main reason— Chairman: Councillor SRI, please continue. Councillor SRI: I note that the main reason it's costing so much is that Council doesn't want to lower speed limits or take road space away from cars. With the notable and laudable exception of the Woolloongabba Bikeway project, Council continues to take the easy road of diverting cyclists through back ways and floodways, rather than more direct routes, thereby depriving small businesses of the opportunity to create vibrant local commercial precincts in the suburbs. We see the same short-sighted thinking when it comes to other areas of the budget. Again this year we see almost no spending on affordable housing, in stark contrast to previous Brisbane City Council administrations that allocated millions of dollar towards community housing organisations like the Brisbane Housing Company, which now finds itself having to increase rents for some of Brisbane's poorest residents due to a lack of continued public funding. Housing is a basic human right, and Council's dereliction of its duty to care for its most vulnerable residents and completely pass the buck to the State Government is disgraceful. I should add for the sake of fairness that the State Government has also failed miserably to allocate sufficient funding towards public housing. With the exception of roads, we see omissions and insufficient allocations in almost every schedule of the budget, particularly park acquisition and upgrades, waterways management, tree planting and maintenance, arts and culture, community facilities, festivals and flood mitigation. Obviously, most of us in this place would like to see more spending on the various programs and services I've just listed. The problem is apparently that there's only so much money to go around, but spending money on many of these items, particularly stormwater drainage and flood mitigation, will save money in the long term, so it's worth taking on debt now to pay for these projects. Our current financial position and credit rating means we can take out loans on good terms and we should be taking advantage of that. To fail to invest in necessary infrastructure, as this Council is doing, will leave a huge burden for future generations of Brisbanites. If I had a bit more influence over this budget, I would take a solid $200 million out of the allocation for widening roads and direct it towards the construction of affordable community housing. I would redirect a large proportion of the rest of the roads budget towards projects that prioritise public transport, carpooling and active transport, including more funding for pedestrian crossings, local area traffic management and bike lanes. Instead of spending $100 million over four years on bike lanes, we should be spending $100 million every year and funding it by taking on debt. As I

mentioned previously, we should also lower speed limits to help bring down the cost of bike infrastructure. To generate additional revenue for the Clean, Green and Sustainable Brisbane Program, I would introduce new classes of rates to target vacant under-utilised land and empty investment properties, and I would also introduce higher rates charges for massive inner city mansions. If millionaires want to live close to the CBD with sprawling private manicured lawns, they should have to pay their fair share. Council should redirect a large chunk of the $3 million graffiti removal allocation towards public art projects, and should increase Council fees for corporate advertising in public spaces to pay for more Public Space Liaison Officers. Our total budget for community festivals is only $760,000, and there's less than $550,000 for multicultural festivals, so instead of funding the futile widening of 700 metres of Lytton Road in East Brisbane, Council could have tripled its local budget allocations for community and multicultural festivals across the city for the next 50 years. I note that there's a lot to celebrate in this budget, it's not all bad, but it falls well short of what's needed to maintain and improve Brisbane residents' quality of life as this city grows. It lacks vision and ambition. There are some truly backwards ideas and projects in there, but also plenty of good ones. The fundamental problem seems to be that this Council doesn't want to take on debt to fund urgently-needed infrastructure. We expect private citizens to take on big mortgages to buy houses, we expect private developers and businesses to take out loans to fund capital works, but we won't do it ourselves, and as a result, the people of Brisbane are missing out. In closing, I've consistently demonstrated in this Chamber that I'm willing to make constructive, positive suggestions. I'm calling for increased spending in a range of areas, but I've also identified practical alternative revenue streams and opportunities to cut unnecessary spending. I want to reiterate the concerns I've raised previously that the process of drafting this budget has been undemocratic, overcentralised and needlessly party political. I believe we would have a better outcome if the LNP worked more collaboratively with Greens, Labor and Independent Councillors, rather than cutting us out of the drafting process. Even now I note that LNP Councillors are interrupting and talking over me, and I think that is a symptom and an example— Chairman: No, Councillor SRI, you can't say that Councillors are interrupting and talking over you when they're not. That is not factually correct. If they were, they would be pulled into order. Councillor SRI: I'll rephrase that, Madam Chair. During my speech just now, Councillors have been calling out and interrupting me. They might not have been doing it at that exact point, but fair enough. Chairman: No, Councillor SRI, they haven't been interrupting you. Councillor SRI: I won't argue the point, Madam Chair, but all I'm trying to say is we could do a lot better and we would do a lot better if we all worked together collaboratively, rather than drawing these strict party lines and simply attacking each other. I think the tone of debate through this whole session has been really disappointing and unnecessarily adversarial and aggressive and I hope all Councillors will reflect on how we can improve that in the project. To close, this budget is a missed opportunity that fails to drive the necessary transition to make Brisbane a more sustainable, more democratic, more equitable city, and I can't support it for that reason. Chairman: Further debate? Councillor ADAMS. Councillor ADAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair, and I stand to support the Annual Plan and Budget for 2017-18.

I would also like to thank the Councillors in this place for the very collegiate debate we had at least yesterday, and the continuing collegiate debate this afternoon on the budget, where everybody can fairly have their say and be heard in this place, as it is a political Chamber. This budget is an infrastructure budget, but it's also about lifestyle and leisure, and I think it's very clear that there are five pillars that this budget has been built on: continuing to deliver congestion-busting road projects; delivering Australia's most modern public transport; creating vibrant liveable communities; making our city sustainable for future generations; and of course, building a strong economy and more local jobs with that economy. Putting it simply, this $3.07 billion budget is looking after our infrastructure investment, and as the LORD MAYOR mentioned, looking after our asset base in what we have already to make sure that it is fit for purpose and safe for our residents. It continues our strong credit rating, and of course, we have the lowest minimum residential rates in South East Queensland. But it's not just about the big-ticket items, it is also making sure that we are prioritising our basic services. Ninety million dollars for smoother suburban streets, $4.8 million for mosquito and pest control, $5.5 million to support the SES (State Emergency Service). We have kerb and channelling and footpath reconstructions at millions of dollars. Our community hall facilities are maintained and enhanced at $4.7 million. We have a customer service delivery at $26.3 million, 19 grass cuts a year in our parks, plus the flying gangs if needed in the hot weather. And of course, this is the one Administration that has been committed to graffiti removal year on year, with $3 million-plus for the last six years in the budget. In our new initiatives, we have got our enhancement of our river bays and waterway activations at $7.9 million. We hear from Councillor CUMMING that we're not doing enough for our buses and our bus drivers. We have got $2.7 million for the Council’s bus safety review initiatives, a review that was put to the bus drivers and to the industry, and we are delivering on that initiative. We’re starting a new program, the international Love Food Hate Waste movement, so we are recycling and educating people about how we don't need to put as much food into our actual waste system. Musgrave Pool refurbishment at $5.8 million. New CityCat coming online in the next 12 months. Councillor CUMMING also likes to mention that it's very city-centric, but hands up on this side if you'd like $100,000 over the next four years to activate the economy in your ward. Well, that is what is being delivered in Wynnum with the beach volleyball program that will be starting there in just a few weeks. We are tackling congestion and building smoother streets. The LORD MAYOR mentioned Kingsford Smith Drive, our road resurfacing, Telegraph Road and Wynnum Road, but we've also got the Wolston Creek Bridge, Stapleton Road and Johnston Road and of course, the Inner City Bypass upgrade. In our suburbs though we've also got our suburban bikeways at $28.3 million. I have to say I absolutely reject the allegations by the Councillor for The Gabba Ward, that there is neglect in our bikeways. We are committed here to connecting those kilometres and kilometres of bikeway, and making it safe for our people to commute or to enjoy them for leisure and recreation. We've got $18.8 million on suburban intersection improvements, $851,000 on our brand new flashing LED warning signs around suburban intersections and pedestrian crossings and around schools to make it safer for our residents. In our leisure and lifestyle opportunities, $307.1 million is being invested. There's clearly support from those in the ALP party for markets, festivals and events in their ward. I thank them for supporting at least the events within their ward in Program 5, but there's also the Council libraries, our aquatic centres, our community facilities, and our river-based leisure and tourism infrastructure. We have committed to 10 outdoor gyms over this term—four of them will come online this year.

And of course, looking forward to not only our Expo 88 artwork, but the celebrations with the MacArthur Museum later in the year, for the 75th commemorations of MacArthur's arriving in Brisbane. Mt Coot-tha is a very important leisure and adventure precinct. It's significant for its horticultural, its learning and its tourism, and we are committing ourselves to making sure that they are the highest level for our residents, our visitors and our tourists. Simpson and JC Slaughter Falls, $1 million for new walking trails, $907,000 to refurbish the Botanic Gardens assets, and of course we are looking forward to the results of the request for proposals for our zipline, which will be coming in in the next couple of months as well. In our local economy, I have to say I'm very disappointed to see that the ALP do not support business in Brisbane, they do not support jobs in Brisbane, and we know they don't support hospitality in Brisbane either. We are making sure we are implementing the New World City Action Plan, which we put together with hundreds of local businesses, corporates, public, private, not-for-profit, charity groups, right across Brisbane, on what we need to move into the future as a New World City. We've got our business hotline, we've got Smart City Initiatives, we're extending our Wi-Fi to suburban centres, we're activating the Wynnum business precinct off the back of a brand new multi-million dollar library that is down there, and of course, we'll be working with the Gold Coast with the Commonwealth Games coming up next year, as one of the major event cities for those events as well. We are keeping Brisbane clean, green and sustainable. We've got $18.1 million in tree management program. I don't know where Councillor STRUNK got a cut from in the budget, when he spoke about that earlier today. There’s $131.2 million on waste management. Three million dollars for the Residential Flood Assistance Program, which I understand was very clearly explained in the Information Session last week, and I spoke on, on ABC radio last week. So to say that this is a secretive program for the residential flood assistance is just not true. We're delivering on public and active transport. I mention the response to the bus safety review, CityCat coming online, and Brisbane Metro obviously at $49.7 million in this financial year. But Madam Chair, I will say it again, we are the only council in Australia to subsidise operating expenditure in public and active transport, at $123.9 million. Councillor interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: We do resent it, Councillor CUMMING, I'll take your interjection, because it is not our job to do. In every other council and place in Australia it is the State Government's role. Councillor interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: But we will not—we will not let our residents down, and we will make sure that they will have the highest level of public and active transport in the country. We have shown clear and financial responsibility that allows us to confidently say that we will fund the majority of the Brisbane Metro. As I mentioned, $49.7 million for this year, but at a cost-benefit ratio of 1.91, it is a project that we will definitely be delivering in this place as well. I would just like to touch on the rates before I finish, Madam Chair. At a 2.4% annual average rate increase, this is a very moderate rate rise of just $9.41 per quarter, or 72 cents per quarter, and we have to look at it as the actual cents per week. Councillor CUMMING says there's 111 suburbs that are over the average. Well, if you count them down there are 85 suburbs that are at or below the average, and 36 of our suburbs have got a negative rate rise this year— 36 suburbs that will be going backwards on their rate rise. It is not good enough to just say, ‘Inala is skyrocketing at six per cent’, when that does not compare monetarily to somewhere else that's coming off a higher base, a higher base.

Councillor interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: And an interest rate of 3.4% or 2.4% can sometimes be more than that. They muddy the waters with the scare tactics and the class divisions, over and over again in this place. Councillors interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: I think it has clearly been shown by the LORD MAYOR and myself tonight, that for an average increase of 72 cents a week, residents in Brisbane do get a significant value for money. I reiterate again, even compared to last year's budgets that we see in our surrounding South East Queensland Council of Mayors, we are significantly the lowest minimum rates in South East Queensland. Madam Chair, our future borrowings over the next decade will be reduced and will never reach as high as Labor's peak in 1992-93 where we had $2,625 per capita. Councillor interjecting. Councillor ADAMS: Our highest peak when the Metro starts with the contractual commitments will be lower than we had for Legacy Way. Madam Chair, I strongly recommend the 2017-18 Annual Plan and Budget to the Chamber. Chairman: Further debate? LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR: Well, Madam Chairman, I thank Councillors again for their contribution to this debate. I just want to make a couple of points in wrapping up. Madam Chairman, I appreciate the effort that Councillor CUMMING put into his wrap-up speech, but I do want to make this point. He's made the analogy of the Gold Coast, that we ought to take a leaf out of the Gold Coast's book. So Madam Chairman, if you want the people of Inala, Madam Chairman, who are paying in the main the minimum rate here in this city, if we want to transfer them to the Gold Coast, Madam Chairman, their rates will go up by 25% overnight, 25%, Madam Chairman, to meet the minimum rates on the Gold Coast. And they can go, Madam Chairman, to any other local authority in South East Queensland— Councillors interjecting. Councillor CUMMING: Point of order, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Point of order against you, LORD MAYOR. Councillor CUMMING. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor BOURKE, please. Councillor CUMMING: Point of order. I claim to be misrepresented, Madam Chairman. Chairman: Thank you. LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR: Madam Chairman, I thought I heard pretty clearly the analogy with the Gold Coast, that we ought to be taking a leaf out of their book. So Madam Chairman, all I'm saying is that, Madam Chairman, if they were to go to the Gold Coast, that's the sort of increase that they would be paying. And it gets much worse than that with some other local authorities adjoining our city. So, Madam Chairman, that's the reality. Madam Chairman, again I could give other minimums, I'm not going to waste the Chamber's time on doing that, but there are plenty of examples if we want to have that debate sometime.

Madam Chairman, I was just also interested, over the last couple of days to hear the constant demands for more expenditure. Now, Councillor CUMMING offered up a few things there. He was talking about the $555,000 in artwork, Madam Chairman, and a couple of other smaller-cost items, Madam Chairman. But I would just say this, that all of the demands for additional expenditure that I've heard over the last two days, we're certainly looking at a lot more than 2.4% rate increase on that. I don't know what it might be, but the figure six comes to mind. That's been a regular number in the past, six per cent increases. But, Madam Chairman, certainly if we were to follow through and meet all the demands for increases that have been spoken about over the last couple of days, we'd be looking at a lot more than 2.4%. Councillor SRI put forward some propositions, Madam Chairman. I listened to all of that with great interest. I'd love to actually get a hold of that speech, and if there was some way I could distribute it across Brisbane, I think I'd be assured of a very strong majority into the future. Madam Chairman, the wacky left mantra we just heard, I talk to a lot of people in this city, Madam Chairman, and if Councillor SRI thinks he's on to a real winner with this one, go for your life. That would be my only advice, Madam Chairman. There was some mention about rate increases as well from Councillor SRI, Kangaroo Point, for example. Again, valuation-based, Madam Chairman, but the rates have gone down 5.7%, 5.7% down, down. Councillor SRI: Point of order, Madam Chair. Councillors interjecting. Chairman: Order, order! Councillor SRI. Councillor SRI: Claim to be misrepresented. Chairman: LORD MAYOR. LORD MAYOR: Okay, Madam Chairman, but look, again I just commend the budget to the Chamber, Madam Chairman. We believe that it does meet the right balance. There's always things you'd like to do more of, but again, we've got to be conscious of the fact that we've got to try and do it in as affordable way as we can, while progressing the city. Chairman: Councillor CUMMING, you had a misrepresentation? Councillor CUMMING: Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. When I spoke about the Gold Coast I said that with all its commitments for the light rail and the Commonwealth Games, it had kept its rates increase in line with the inflation rate, and the Brisbane City Council should be able to achieve the same. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: Councillor SIMMONDS! Councillor SRI, your misrepresentation. Councillor SRI: Thanks, Madam Chair. The only reference I made to Kangaroo Point in my speech was in regards to the fact that it doesn't have a high-frequency bus route. I wasn't making any comments about rates in Kangaroo Point.

Motion put: The Chairman submitted the motion for the adoption of the 2017-18 Budget to the Chamber and it was declared carried on the voices.

Thereupon, Councillor Andrew WINES, and Councillor Matthew BOURKE immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in the motion being carried.

AYES: 20 - The Right Honourable, the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK, DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista ADAMS, Adam ALLAN, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC, Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN, Kate RICHARDS, Julian SIMMONDS, Steven TOOMEY, Andrew WINES and Norm WYNDHAM.

NOES: 6 - The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Peter CUMMING, and Councillors Jared CASSIDY, Steve GRIFFITHS, Charles STRUNK, Shayne SUTTON and Jonathan SRI.

Chairman: As that concludes the presentation and consideration of the 2017 Annual Plan and Budget, before I actually close the meeting I would like to extend a vote of thanks to the clerks and all those Council officers behind the budget process, including all of the support staff in the Office of City Governance, the Office of CEO, the Council and Committee Liaison Office, Brisbane City Legal, the City Hall Operations and the security staff and also the CEO. Councillor interjecting. Chairman: I now declare the budget meeting closed.

RISING OF COUNCIL: 5.49pm.

PRESENTED: and CONFIRMED

CHAIRMAN

Council officers in attendance:

Colin Jensen (Chief Executive Officer) Jo Camamile (Senior Council and Committee Officer) Rob Southwood (Acting Senior Council and Committee Officer) Emily Blake (Acting Council and Committee Officer) T-J Gutsell (Acting Council and Committee Officer) Billy Peers (Personal Support Officer to the Lord Mayor and Council Orderly)

[4530 (Budget) Meeting – 14 June 2017]