Transport Minister Eric Abetz says he continues to be ‘surprised and delighted’ by the public’s strong support for his decision to withdraw $170,000 in funding for a cycle lane trial in Hobart’s CBD.
Abetz said he received “all sorts of dire warnings” before making the announcement on the Collins Street project and is “heartened” by the community’s response.
“It’s one of those surprises that you get every now and then,” he said.
“When even the ABC online commentary and polling of … Pulse Tasmania has support for the decision at about 80% and you then have a Lord Mayor attacking you, saying there’s no support for this decision, you sort of wonder how there are these two parallel universes.”
He said encouraging people to walk and cycle is important and something the state government will continue to promote.
“You cannot be so ideologically motivated that you would say the commuters who need parking spaces, the commuters that need to be able to travel through Hobart without too much inconvenience, that the small businesses, that the property owners, indeed bus drivers complaining about the proposal as well, should all be ignored in the pursuit of cycleways,” he said.
“There has to be a sensible, mature balance in these decisions and that is why we as a government, in announcing 18 other active transport projects, felt the need to pull the funding in relation to these bike paths.”
Abetz said he was also “disappointed” that Lord Mayor Anna Reynolds was last week quick to indicate “she’s going to fund it all anyway”.
“Which tells me they had a stash of cash in the corner and they were just playing us for fools in saying that they needed our money to partner with them,” he said.
“But that aside, it is up to the ratepayers of Hobart to determine whether or not they want that sort of leadership in their council.”
At a council meeting on Monday night, seven councillors voted to proceed with the cycle lane trial, reallocating money from the council’s contingency budget.
During the meeting, Reynolds said she had quickly clarified the project’s status to address public confusion.
“It was important to clarify that the project could still go ahead,” she said.
“I think there was just a bit of confusion in the public narrative about whether the state government could cancel the project.”
