I wonder why the people of Adelaide would want to re-elect Michael Harbison as their Mayor when he seems to be steering the city of Adelaide toward the “Clayton’s” solution to global warming.
Of course we all know about the “Clayton’s” solution – “the one that you have when you don’t have a solution”. This is the one that John Howard has attempted to impose on the nation. It might look and feel OK from a distance but it is mostly irrelevant – a diversion that will keep the rest of us occupied while his big business mates continue to rape and pillage.
Now I only mention this because Michael has been Mayor of Adelaide for six years and a city councillor since 1998 – nearly ten years.
His re-election web-site tells the glorious story of his achievements as councillor and mayor with a lot of emphasis on his “environmental” credentials. Check it out and read his articles on “A Green City” and his personal commitment to the environment and riding a bike.
Now I don’t want to get between a mayor trying to be re-elected and his constituents but what about the big issues facing the city of Adelaide? Does he even know what they are?
I don’t pretend to be an expert on Adelaide matters but I do know what frustrates me enormously there. Last week I wrote Michael an email asking him what his plans are for the Adelaide traffic system – here is what I said.
Hi Michael,
It is good to see that you have a website and are prepared to talk about your achievements and invite commentary and questions from the people of Adelaide.
Many years ago when I was a conscript we had a saying about the mission of the Australian Army - it was “Hurry up and wait”. That seemed to be the single thing that drove the place and which all conscripts could identify with - we had to rush to get somewhere and then we had to wait.
Well it seems that Adelaide has adopted the theme.
The local traffic management system was obviously designed to keep people waiting in the city. It’s a stop start system that seems intent on wasting time and money. Progress through Adelaide is a series of small steps from intersection to intersection - each followed by an excruciating wait for the signals to change to green so we can continue to the next - only to approach and confront the dreaded red light.
Some think it was designed like this - but did anyone calculate the impact in terms of fuel and pollution cost and wasted time?
A simple calculation will show that the cost in wasted time, fuel and pollution is enormous. The cost of fixing the system is probably large but using smart technology, it is likely to be significantly less than the cost of doing nothing. The environmental savings alone would justify urgent action.
The benefit/cost ratio is likely to be compelling – so why won’t the city council and the state government fix it?
Regards,
Roger
Michael’s response was.
Roger, well spotted I think you are right.
We have recently joined our traffic light coordination to the states to
achieve metro wide synchronisation, but Waiting for the benefits does
now seem to be the operative word.
I will keep trying
Michael
How long do we wait I wonder? Clearly the city council worked out that this was a big risk and a liability and so they offloaded responsibility to the State Government.
Many questions exist around the “process” that the council and the state went through to pass this issue across, especially the liability that seems to have moved between the council and the state. Does anyone understand the implications?
The truth is that the Adelaide city council has ignored important issues associated with the Adelaide traffic system over an extended period of time. The people of Adelaide have been subjected to a stop-start system that not only wastes time but also imposes enormous additional fuel and environmental costs.
How can the Mayor pretend to have a green agenda when for 30 years his council has ignored the largest environmental impact in the city? What is his real vision? Does he even have one?
When are we going to get a council and council politicians who understand and reflect the needs of the community with respect to the environment?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
hiRoger, good to see you out spreading the word. the tension is between the people who want to let the cars run smoothly and thos who want to block the cars and force people onto bikes. I say lets work it out together, and that we have to get from where we are now to where we want to go.While smooth traffic flow is your answer to global warming, many well meaning environmentalists think the exact opposite. I say, lets do both; make the traffic system work and make a city that works for bikes and pedestrians too. why does everything take so long? Didny your dad tell you that anything involving more than three people is a hassle, but you just have to stick at it. Anyhow, I must go, its raining and I need to check my tanks.
Cheers
Michael
Post a Comment