Minutes of proceedings

Chairman: Further debate on Program 1?

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Thanks, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I rise to speak on the Clean Green and WaterSmart City program, Program 1, and it's in relation to 2015-16 Budget, my points. Can I say, Madam Chair, that while we've heard a lot of bleating on the other side of the Chamber about what a great budget this is for the city, for southside residents it's one of neglect. Some of the points I'd like to raise, just as I start this, is pick up the point that Councillor FLESSER made in regards to the number of carryovers that have been brought through this budget. The fact that it looks like a healthy budget, but in fact it's a budget of carryovers.

The second point, Madam Chair, is in relation to the expense column on page 16 between this and last year’s budget and this year’s budget and the number of cuts there are. In particular, 1.2, Madam Chair, Sustainable Brisbane has been cut. 1.6, the focus on the river, bay and waterways has been cut and 1.7, flood risk management has been cut and that's in relation to expenses.

Madam Chair, this is shocking. It's shocking not only because these are areas that we need extra funding in, it's shocking because you would actually think the LNP might be trying to look after some of those areas of the city, particularly in an election year. But let's concentrate on our healthy waterways and litter and flooding. I know Councillor JOHNSTON brought this issue up before and made some very reasonable points. In fact, some of the worst areas of our city that flood are on the south side. They're in Councillor JOHNSTON and my areas.

They're areas that are not actually getting well funded in relation to looking after the water ways, be it with litter, be it in keeping them clear or be it with infrastructure. The creeks I refer to, Madam Chair, on the south side are Stable Swamp Creek, Rocky Waterholes, Moolabin Creek, Norman Creek and of course that all fits into the—well, for the first three, they all fit into the Oxley Creek catchment. I suppose my main point in relation to the Oxley Creek catchment is as one of our city's largest waterway or I believe it is our city's largest waterway, it actually tracks a rating D in relation to its health.

So it's surprising that a creek that actually has one of the lowest ratings is receiving the least amount of resources in terms of looking after that creek. It certainly flies in the face of what is stated here in the budget, that 95 per cent of residents regard waterways, healthy waterways, healthy creeks and a healthy river as being important to them, but also as being important to the bay. Madam Chair, but enough of me talking. I actually have some pictures here that I would like to give to every Councillor, so I leave those there to be tabled and one to be tabled. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Here are pictures taken in the last week or so, so within the budget period. This is Stable Swamp Creek. This is what the LNP have been delivering. This is the only way I can show you what I’m talking about, and that's with pictures. The amount of rubbish and debris in our creeks that is flowing down Stable Swamp Creek from suburbs such as Sunnybank, Coopers Plains, MacGregor and other areas of our city is appalling. So it's obviously not being picked up at source. It's going into our drains, it's going into our waterways, it is going into our river and then it is going into our bay.

This is what this Council is delivering now. It's appalling. Please have a look at the pictures. You'll see there that there's plenty of debris. If you look closely at the picture, you’ll actually see that there's a large container jammed in the middle of the waterway there under the bridge, blocking the waterway. Madam Chair, no one could be proud of this. In fact, the last time I saw a scene like this was when I was travelling through India.

Councillor MURPHY: A point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: A point of order against you Councillor GRIFFITHS.

Yes, Councillor MURPHY.

Councillor MURPHY: Madam Chair, we all appreciate show and tell is a very nice thing, but we're here to debate the budget. I’m just wondering if Councillor GRIFFITHS can address his comments to the budget.

Chairman: Thank you. I won't uphold your point of order, Councillor MURPHY.

Councillor GRIFFITHS.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes. Thanks, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, my point here is that this is the current state of our waterways and we've cut funding for waterways in this budget in terms of expenses. This is the current state of waterways on the south side of the city. Residents call or tell me they call it the forgotten side of the city by this LORD MAYOR. Residents tell me they're sick of seeing no infrastructure. They tell me that they’re sick of seeing now services and they’re sick of a mayor that doesn’t stand up for them.

I can see Angela Owen-Taylor, Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR is agreeing with me almost in the way she's nodding her head. Madam Chair, what we're seeing is major spends on the north side in terms of our waterways and good. Good. That's—it should be. We should be spending money on our waterways. I appreciate that.

But let's not neglect the waterways that are getting the lowest ratings in our city, which brings me to another point, Madam Chair, and that's our Creek Ranger program. Madam Chair, I understand in the northern suburbs or the western suburbs they have two creek rangers to fund looking after those programs there. Two creek rangers. On the south side, the east side and the north side, they only have one creek ranger. So hence the number of groups that want to participate in cleaning these creeks up can't, because we haven’t got the resources to do it, and we haven’t had the resources to do it for years.

Meanwhile, probably one of our cleanest, best looked after waterways in Brisbane is getting more resources to do it. Well, look, Madam Chair, if I produces a good outcome, great. That's good. I support clean waterways, but let's put the resources into the waterways that are the dirtiest, not the cleanest. Let's look at what we're doing. Let's stop playing politics with this and actually go after some results. Madam Chair, all this rubbish is going to end up in the bay. It's going to end up in our river. It's going to end up in our bay. That's not good for anyone.

So if you don’t like a Labor seat or there's some reason you don’t want to fund something, that's fine, but think a bit bigger picture. Think actually about our waterways, our Brisbane in terms of the river and also the bay. Madam Chair, I have some other photos here as well that I'll just table. I think that was enough in terms of giving people an idea of what's going on. But the other point of contention is in relation to litter. I will table this just for the record rather than for everyone. This is Ipswich Road once again. It's our biggest, most neglected road in the city. It is the dirtiest road in the city.

It is not a state road. From Granard Road in—let me put it clearly on the record, because obviously our Chairpersons are so incompetent they can't even find this out from the officers—yes. He doesn’t—even though it's Council, so he doesn’t realise it has got to have resources spent on it. From Granard Road in on Ipswich Road, it's Council. It's a Council road. It's our responsibility, which is probably why it is the dirtiest road in Brisbane. Madam Chair, every time I drive along that road, every day I see this rubbish 

Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS. Councillor GRIFFITHS—

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Madam Chair—

Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, can I suggest you start relating it to the budget please?

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes, Madam Chair. Certainly. Then this is certainly the waste program. This is actually about how we allocate the waste program and currently my point is the waste program is not being allocated effectively on to the south side of the city. This waste program is missing the south side. This is proof of that. I’m happy at any time—at any time—to take the LORD MAYOR out and show him that, so that potentially we might see some results on the south side. Madam Chair, in relation to other areas of this particular budget, it is disappointing that so little is being spent on our creeks out that way in terms of flooding.

We know that that is the area that floods every time it rains. We've got the flood buyback program and I welcome more funding in this part of the budget, but once again, my point is we need to actually look at the criteria for the buybacks, because we now have some houses that are in flooded areas that we can't buyback, because of our criteria. In one street, we've got three houses left that could—that should be bought back. We can close the street off, we'll save money. The residents want to sell up. We could actually clear this area up. We need to review how that money is spent, renew the criteria, so that we can get some results. If we're genuine, we should be getting some results so that we're reducing the amount of people affected by flooding.

Chairman: Councillor GRIFFITHS, your time has expired.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Thank you.

Chairman: Further debate?

Councillor KING.

Councillor KING: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise in support of the Clean Green and Water Smart City. All on this side of the Chamber, Madam Chair, are the side that delivers projects and has initiatives—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor KING: —for new projects.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor KING: This side—

Chairman: Order.

Councillor KING: This side of the—

Chairman: Thank you.

Councillor KING: —Chamber have vision for this growing city. I would like to add something that Councillor MURPHY said and it was actually confirmed by Councillor DICK. That the mall when I was a teenager or late teens or going into uni years—yes. A lady doesn't say how long ago that was—but, Madam Chair, the Brisbane City Mall was a no-go zone. You didn’t go to the mall in the evenings, because it was considered dirty and somewhere where you didn’t go.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor KING: It was—hardly anybody was in the mall at that time and Councillor DICK admitted that he knew—

Chairman: Order.

Councillor KING: —that it was in the 1990s under a Soorley Government. Now, we have a mall that is clean—

Councillor DICK: A point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: A point of order against you—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order. A point of order against you, Councillor KING.

Yes, Councillor DICK.

Councillor DICK: It only took her a minute for her to get it wrong, but could I claim to be misrepresented, please, Madam Chair.

Councillor KING: We haven’t spoken on it.

Chairman: Thank you.

Councillor KING: Whoops.

Chairman: No. You haven’t.

Councillor KING: He yelled out.

Chairman: You haven’t spoken today, Councillor DICK, so it's a bit hard.

Councillor KING: You interjected.

Chairman: You have the opportunity to speak in the program.

Councillor KING.

Councillor KING: Madam Chair, Councillor DICK certainly did interject and say it was in the 1990s under a Soorley Government. Madam Chair, this mall that we've got, thank you to Field Services and under Councillor McLACHLAN—

Chairman: Councillor—just a minute, Councillor KING.

Councillor ABRAHAMS, if you continue to interject like that, you will be warned. You don’t have the floor. Because you don’t agree with something said does not give you the right to loudly interject constantly throughout every meeting, so be quiet.

Thank you, Councillor KING.

Councillor KING: They don’t like the truth, Madam Chair. Under Councillor McLACHLAN and his team, the Brisbane City Mall is more vibrant, cleaner and a safer place to be, so I thank Councillor McLACHLAN and his team for providing those services for a clean city. Madam Chair, this side has vision for the future, unlike Councillor FLESSER with his comments of King George Square, which he signed off on when he was in cabinet.

What Councillor FLESSER wants is a water fountain, I think he said, in King George Square and grass for people to sit on. Madam Chair, again, as a young person growing up in this city, you could never sit on the grass because it was always fenced off. So Councillor FLESSER should remember that he was the one who signed off on King George Square. Madam Chair—and for Councillor GRIFFITHS to say that he wants more money in the budget for the flood buyback system, the ALP didn’t even do it. They didn’t even do it. They covered it up—

Councillor GRIFFITHS: A point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Order.

Point of order against you, Councillor KING.

Yes, Councillor GRIFFITHS.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Claim to be misrepresented.

Chairman: Thank you. Councillor KING.

Councillor KING: He clearly said, Madam Chair, that he wanted more money in the budget for the flood buyback, which the ALP never had in their budgets and never had once in their time of Administration, Madam Chair. This proves they have no vision. They have absolutely no vision—

Councillor interjecting.

Chairman: Order. Councillor NEWTON.

Councillor KING: —for our city.

Chairman: You’re like a broken record.

Councillor KING: Madam Chair, to hear about—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor KING: You know, when I—again, growing up in this beautiful city, there was always a thing about the north and south side. Always. Those people opposite want to bring back that divide and separate our city. I am really sorry that we are—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor KING: —delivering Councillor NEWTON's area on the north side, Councillor FLESSER's area on the north side.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor KING: Shame, Councillor COOPER, for you delivering for your residents out there in Bracken Ridge, a great suburb. Councillor WYNDHAM, I can't believe you’ve got projects on the north side.

Councillor interjecting.

Chairman: Councillor SUTTON.

Councillor KING: If those people on the opposite side would be in charge of this place, the north side would be neglected, as it was under Jim Soorley, Madam Chair.

Councillors interjecting.

Councillor KING: Madam Chair, I am delighted to say that we have some wonderful parks on the north side of Brisbane and I’m glad that we're getting some upgrades in those parks. May I also remind, besides these upgrades, each and every one of us gets $448,000 to spend in parks or in footpaths across our city. I’m glad to see that Seventh Brigade will have some safety lighting at the park, Madam Chair, around that kids space area with new shade sails and upgrading that facility. I’m also delighted to see solar lights for one of my dog off-leash areas that people have been asking for for many, many years.

Lanham Park is having a barbecue and shelter upgrade. Marchant Park is receiving some exercise equipment to again encourage our residents to come out and enjoy our beautiful open spaces and be fit and healthy. Huxtable Park will also receive exercise equipment in conjunction with the neighbours of Huxtable Park. This is a joint project with that group. Healthy Waterways, we are investing more than ever before in our Healthy Waterways. Shand Street along Kedron Brook will be receiving further works in the Healthy Waterways area.

The Boulevard in Chermside, work is happening there now and will continue over the next financial year, with more work happening on the Zillman Waterholes and Somerset Creek. Those opposite seem to think that this side is not delivering, Madam Chair, but Marchant Ward has certainly turned around and Bracken Ridge Ward since this—Enoggera Ward, in particular, Councillor WINES—since this Administration has taken office. Madam Chair, this initiative of this side of the Chamber with the tip shops has been a great success.

As we all know as a growing city, waste is becoming an issue of where it goes and how to manage. This Administration, under Councillor McLACHLAN, is managing that and winning awards in what they're doing. The tip shop at Geebung is a fantastic place. I’ve been there quite a few times myself to have a look through, with over 47,000 visitors. Because of the size of this initiative, with the two tip shops, we have saved over 380,000 tonnes of waste in our city. It's always with our kerb side collection too, it's always amazing how one person's trash is another person's treasure.

So, Madam Chair, this side of the Chamber is doing a lot to deliver for our city, both north and south and I commend this report.

Chairman: Further debate?

Councillor SUTTON.

Councillor SUTTON: Thank you.

Chairman: Sorry. Councillor GRIFFITHS had a misrepresentation.

Councillor GRIFFITHS: Yes. Thanks, Madam Chair. I didn’t actually say that I was asking for more money for the flood buyback. I actually said we need to look at the criteria and how we're spending that money.

Chairman: Thank you.

Councillor SUTTON, my apology.

Councillor SUTTON: Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on Program 1 today, and it's—hope to do better than comedy hour that we've just heard from the other side of the Chamber. Look, there are a number of issues that we have with this program obviously. Among them include some of the flooding—the reductions in flooding expenditure in terms of preparing our city for this flood—floods.

The Labor Councillors have been very critical about the fact that this—time and time again this Administration does not prepare for the costs of cleaning up from storm damage in our city and inclusive of that, we see in this year's budget a 62 per cent drop in proposed expenditure for Catchment Flood Risk Management Plans. We see a cut of 52 per cent to—on expenses to maintain and enhance flood models and we see the service item, flooding investigations and planning for a Flood Smart Future Project cut by 46.6 per cent.

That does not instil us with any great confidence that this city is continuing to prepare for the flooding issues that we are having. Of course, that is just not—that is not just river flooding. It is flooding, it is overland flow flooding, it is creek flooding. We have had some significant—this year, some significant downpours that has seen overland flooding and stormwater overland flow flood people's houses that have not previously been flooded. I have had in some of the severe events earlier this year, we had houses flood in Seven Hills, in Morningside that had not flooded before.

Had water inside that—inside their homes for the first time in the home owners’ memory and those homeowners had been there for quite some time, so it does cause some significant concern that this Administration would, as one of its priorities, is to actually cut the work we are doing on flood-proofing Brisbane. That is certainly, to me, smacks of wrong priorities under an Administration that is led by someone who has been around for 30 years.

Of course, need I say, more and more, as this unashamedly pro development Administration continues to approve inappropriate develop in our suburbs all the time, we are actually seeing more and more existing properties that are flooding as a consequence of that unit development next door to them or just up the road that never previously flooded. This Administration is lacking sorely when it comes to flood proofing and—

Councillor SUTTON: No. It's—

Chairman: Order.

Councillor SUTTON: It actually is lacking Soorley's vision. I will say that.

Chairman: Order. Order.

Councillor SUTTON: You guys need to be nice to me. I’m sick. The other thing—moving on. Leaving that particular—moving on from flooding, we want to talk about delivery and I did have to laugh when Councillor KING got up and said that they are the Administration who delivers and, of course, we see yet again in this year's budget the requirement to actually include funding for Karawatha Visitors Centre. Well, it has only been—what is it? Eight years or 10 years? 10 years since this Administration first started talking about building the Karawatha Forest and Environmental Centre.

So that leads me to another project funded in this year's budget, which is the Mount Coot-tha Visitors Information Centre, so I just want to do a little wager here today. I just want to start taking bets. I will be running a tab to see how long it's going to take this Administration to actually build the Mount Coot-tha Visitor Information Centre. Is it going to be five years? Is it going to be 10 years or are we all still going to be standing here in 15 years time desperately waiting for somebody to cut a ribbon on that Mount Coot-tha Visitor Information Centre?

Then we get to grass cuts and all the virtues that the LNP Councillors get up and say we're doing all these grass cuts, we're doing all these grass cuts. Well, Madam Chair, this mob gave a mowing contract to people who did not own mowers. So I think that we should actually wait and see the proof in the pudding to see if they are actually capable of delivering on what they have promised to do or what they have funded to do, because I would wager that we are actually not going to see that amount of cuts.

We are actually going to see more and more—more and more complaints, as we have in this city in the last calendar year. We are going to continue to see complaints about this Administration's failure to cut the grass, a basic Council service.

I have to say, in my experience as a Local Councillor, I have not had so many complaints as I have recently about not just the fact that the grass is not being mowed, but when it is being mowed, the mess that they leave behind and the damage that it does to other people's properties, not to mention the fact that I’ve actually had to action complaints about people who have seen the grass contractors toileting themselves in public in view of school children. So I actually think that we could do far, far better when it comes to cutting the grass in this city.

Somewhere else that we can do much better is on security lighting and parks lighting. It was very interesting to get the answers and to get the answers to the scheduled list of park upgrade works to add up exactly how much money this Administration will be spending on security lighting in parks this year. Now, in those list of schedules, there are a couple of projects in there that lighting is only one aspect of the park upgrade. So from my estimation, this Administration is spending just slightly less than $800,000 this financial year, this coming financial year, on security lighting in parks.

About $800,000. That pales in significance to the $1.6 million we're spending on lighting shows in this city. So this is an example of wrong priorities under the Liberal National Administration in this place. They would prefer to spend more money on light shows and fun than making our parks safe with adequate lighting. That is their—in the suburbs. That is their priority. That is LORD MAYOR Graham Quirk's been in this place for 30 years. He says, light shows are more important than upgrading security and providing security lighting in our Council parks.

I think that that is an absolute example of LORD MAYOR, Graham Quirk's, mistaken priorities for this city. Moving on to waste and litter, and I know Councillor McLACHLAN likes to get up and spruik this Administration's litter protection—litter credentials.

We all read the civic cabinet minutes that went from Campbell Newman's time, where every Monday morning there was an assessment across the city about how many cigarette butts Campbell Newman actually had to see on his way into the city, in the way into City Hall and how much extra resources we needed for that, but I have to say, in my experience, as Councillor GRIFFITHS has indicated, we actually could do a lot better when it comes to litter collection. An example of this struck me just this week.

On Saturday morning I drove past the rail overpass near Morningside just down the road it was clearly obvious that there had been a group of people sitting under a tree near that rail overpass on Friday night and they had left a collection of bottles and I thought, given that we had the budget, I thought, normally, I would call that in. I would call that in and say, someone needs to go and clean up that area. I thought, no. No. I'll wait. I'll see what our friends—I won't call it on this occasion. I'll wait to see how long it takes our Council to proactively pick up that litter. I'll wait. I'll wait.

So that was—I saw it on Saturday morning and it's a rather significant pile of bottles, I would say. They clearly had—they were clearly there for the long haul. It's now—I drove past it this morning. It's still there. So I’m just wondering whether or not—how long it will be or whether or not as a consequence of raising it here in the Chamber today someone might actually spring into action to get it sorted, Madam Chair—

Chairman: Order.

Councillor SUTTON: —because I just thought that was a good—

Chairman: Order.

Councillor SUTTON: —test. I thought that might be a good test, just to see how proactive we are at collecting litter in this city. Just to see how—but moving on to some—moving on to some local projects. Well, I welcome in this program the funding for the backflow valve Jamieson Street, it is long overdue. There have been homes that have been flooded since the 2011 flood—

Chairman: Councillor SUTTON, your time has expired. Thank you.

Councillor MARX?

Councillor MARX: Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, and I rise to speak on Program 1, Clean Green and Water Smart City. I actually today have in front of me the—Kim Marx Team Quirk Karawatha Ward promises, election promises for the 2012 election. It states quite clearly, deliver the Karawatha Environment Centre at Karawatha Park. So I’ve been here since 2012, so that's when my clock started on this and my reckoning—

Chairman: Order. Order. Councillor SUTTON.

Councillor MARX: My reckoning, we have eight months and 25 days left of this term to deliver that promise. So my invitation to everyone here in the place, and I know that most of the other Councillors on the other side will not actually be here by the time 2016 rolls around, so you have an open invitation in your retirement years, in your retirement years, which you’re leaving here on your own accord in your retirement years, come down to the Karawatha Ward, come to the discovery centre and I will make you a coffee and show you around. I'm—yes, instant coffee. Yes. I’m just an instant kind of girl.

So the point I’m making is that this is a centre that construction is underway and my residents out there are more than happy with the Administration and the work we're doing here at this place. It's also quite interesting that of all the debate that's happened here this morning from the other side, 90 per cent of it has been about the Karawatha Forest Discovery Centre, so I’m pleased now that my ward has got such great recognition out there, because everyone loves talking about it. I'm very happy about that, because I know when I became the Councillor, it was a little known ward.

It was very rarely spoke about. The Council call centre didn’t even know where it was, so now everyone is talking about Karawatha and I think that that's a good thing. Moving on to rubbish, annual kerbside collection. Councillor McLACHLAN mentioned that it's a little talked about subject as far as rubbish goes and he is right, but—and he says, out of sight, out of mind, but I can rest assured, Councillor McLACHLAN that if we're not doing it, the residents let us know. So it's one of those things that when it's not there, you don’t notice it. We're certainly delivering on that and my residents are extremely happy.

I also want to go to page 145 of the budget book, which talks about the Conservation Reserves Management program. Quite clearly it shows there's almost $500,000 just delivering in the Karawatha Ward alone in the forest area on conservation reserves management. Now, my last looking at the map, Karawatha is on the south side, as is the Parkinson Ward is on the south side. So to say that the south side is getting nothing, I think, is a furphy.

I think the budget book speaks for itself and I want to commend the Chair's and the Council's officers on the all the work that they do, not only in our wards, but the city as a whole. I think this budget is a great example of how the LORD MAYOR is delivering for our city. Thank you.

Chairman: Further debate?

Councillor ABRAHAMS.

Councillor ABRAHAMS: Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I also wish to enter the debate. Madam Chair, the first item I'd like to discuss is the climate change item. Hang on. I’m just trying to get my pages up. Yes. Thank you. Madam Chair, in 2013 14, there was $17 million put aside for the first two items in terms of managing climate change. This year, Madam Chair, we see a drop from $12 million last year to $9.2 million this year. A drop of almost $3 million and, Madam Chair, I’m very aware that is because the federal government money that was to help with the LED traffic lights project is no longer here.

But, Madam Chair, the point is that this Administration is only putting money into climate change when they're getting funding from the Federal Government. Surely, there are more projects that they could actually be undertaking in this really important national and global issue. An issue, Madam Chair, that this Council was very proud to be leading, both in local government and in State responses. Well, those days are well and truly gone.

But, Madam Chair, it was interesting to hear that the Chair said that there had been an increase in funding, which is contrary to the lack of the $3 million and that was for one item, which was for the sustainability events, which has gone from $599,000 to $623,000. Interesting the increase was not itemised by the chair. That's an increase of $24,000. Madam Chair, that's just twice CPI. I would suggest that's almost volumetric changes. It would not be something within this whole program I would actually be saying is an increase, as the Chair was wishing us to believe.

But, Madam Chair, let's just look at what the CitySmart Proprietary Limited, who is the agency that is responsible for Council's climate change initiatives in these two programs. Madam Chair, if you go to the website, you can see that there are 14 staff associated with CitySmart Proprietary Limited. Put aside the CEO and their PA, you’ve got seven staff that have marketing or event skills management that Council is funding. Madam Chair, in those seven staff, the website very clearly in their annual report advises what they have done.

Four newsletters per year, two City fair events that we're very aware and we have every year two City fair events, one on the south and one on the north. So that should be a fairly procedural thing to organise. As well as that, they organise Clean Up Australia Day. Seven staff, Madam Chair. Four newsletters, two fairs and Clean Up Australia Day. Is this value for money? But what's more, the LORD MAYOR in his speech said that he was announcing two new programs under the CitySmart initiatives.

One, Reduce Your Juice, was to work with young people and it would have a saving of 19 per cent of their annual electricity bill. The other one, Madam Chair, was a program called Live For Less and that was itemised in the budget document. But, Madam Chair, if you go to the CitySmart website, in the newsletter for March 2014, so that's 15 months ago, it stated that there was $6.5 million for a low income energy efficiency program, which was to deliver innovative approaches to help vulnerable young renters have behavioural change to reduce their energy.

In June 2014 newsletter, Madam Chair, 12 months ago, that was rebadged as Reduce Your Juice program. So now we're having the LORD MAYOR, a year later, announcing a program that no one has known about, because you don’t know anything, which is my final point, Madam Chair, of the funding that we have put into CitySmart. Is there any annual report brought to Council? Is there any outcomes or outputs brought to Council? Is there any achievements brought to Council? No, Madam Chair.

This is the biggest amount of money that is completely unaccountable and we have no access and, Madam Chair, it is not on the website either. So I am really concerned—and I think it's quite legit, for the residents of Brisbane, who are forking out $4.4 million, to know whether they're achieving value for the dollars that Council is investing in this project.

Madam Chair, the next issue that I would wish to talk about is the issue of the parks and the allocation of funding in the parks. Because, Madam Chair, there has been a theme very much for the Opposition Councillors, very much saying that some wards are getting no money and that there is a deficiency of an expenditure in the southern suburbs. So, Madam Chair, if you just have a quick look at the schedules for the capital expenditure in parks it reveals interesting information. The parks asset, maintenance and rehabilitation have 20 projects in Liberal wards and five in Labor wards; that's a ratio of one to four.

Now before the Chair gets up and says, well it is proportion to the numbers of Councillors may I point out that that ratio is one to three. So in theory unless there is for some reason that the Liberal wards after all this time of a Liberal Administration, who have been putting money into it, suddenly there was some reason for them to have all of the equipment and all of the need to be different from Labor Councillors, I would suggest there should be an equity of roughly two thirds to that side of the Chamber and one third to this side of the Chamber.

So the first one, the strike rate was five to 20. The park infrastructure facilities and landscape, the strike rate is 26 to the Liberals, four to Councillors on this side. Councillor, I am including the Tennyson Ward on the Councillors on this side. It gets worse; Play Safe, 11 Play Safe projects to Liberals, and one, and I'm very delighted, it is in my ward, one on this side of the Chamber. The upgrades to neighbourhood parks, 77 to Liberal wards and 13 to Labor. Madam Chair, that never, on any of these projects ever goes anywhere near that two thirds to one third ratio.

Councillor BOURKE: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Point of order against you Councillor ABRAHAMS.

Yes, Councillor?

Councillor BOURKE: Will Councillor ABRAHAMS take a question?

Chairman Councillor ABRAHAMS?

Councillor ABRAHAMS: If I have time at the end, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Thank you.

Councillor ABRAHAMS: Madam Chair, this is clearly pork barrelling of park projects in the budget coming up to the election. There is no other way to justify and to explain away these figures. Shame on you, shame on you as Administration. It is so extreme that it is—

Councillor SIMMONDS: Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Point of order, against you Councillor ABRAHAMS.

Yes, Councillor SIMMONDS?

Councillor SIMMONDS: This is quite clearly imputing motive and quite insulting frankly.

Chairman: Yes, yes.

Councillor ABRAHAMS please get back to the debate.

Councillor ABRAHAMS: Madam Chair, I just have one more comment and then I will move on. Madam Chair, the LORD MAYOR is elected to represent all of the people in all of the wards appropriately. This is not in one of the issues that residents may switch and that is expenditure of parks in their area. So, Madam Chair, it is extremely disappointing.

Finally, Madam Chair, again we have a huge expenditure in the key city parks by about $11 million. Every year that expenditure is never itemised, never given to the residents, never showing just where that funding is going. Madam Chair, for $11 million not to be highlighted, to be kept in secret, not to be transparent, I think is unacceptable and it's no wonder when you have a carryover of $1.7 million in that project.

Chairman: Councillor ABRAHAMS your time has expired. Thank you. Further debate?

Councillor KNAPP.

Councillor KNAPP: Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I rise to speak on all of the elements within this terrific program, Clean, Green and WaterSmart City and the waste. Madam Chair, we are a city. We are made up of various wards where we're all absolutely passionate about providing the things, particularly the playgrounds and the parks within our wards. I for one, over 18 years being starved while I was in Opposition, managed to squirrel away money through various things and replace all of the playgrounds in my ward.

I'm delighted that the playgrounds in my ward are receiving some funding because they now need some replacement. Particularly I'm delighted there is $150,000 allocated for the funding in relation to Walton Bridge which is the historic park; Walton Bridge is 110 years old, for us to actually engage and continue the engagement about what we are going to do. Now there is an expectation somewhere along the line that some parks should have $3 million spent on them.

The reality is that most of our parks, unless they are regional parks, have about $200,000 to $300,000 spent on them; some of it is play equipment, some of it is sport equipment, some of it is exercise equipment but, Madam Chair—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order. Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor KNAPP: —what has been funded in my ward and I am not going to detail the parks—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor KNAPP: —within my ward, has been a modest amount which really reflects the way that I think my parks should be managed. Madam Chair, we talk about a clean, green city and I don't know whether I'm reading the same budget book as everybody else, however we're putting $4.5 million towards 100 per cent green power. We're paying the carbon offset. We're doing our compliance and administration to make the city green. The integrated environment management in relation to make that a sustainable Brisbane.

If we talk about the Green Heart which came out of us, out of our side, Madam Chair, the Green Heart city, the concept of how you engage, we fund the Green Heart operation but we've got the Green Heart homes and schools. What a terrific program is that, Madam Chair. The Green Heart sustainability invests and I know that we got the money from the Federal Government for Live for Less for Seniors to understand how they could manage it. What a terrific program, Madam Chair.

The conservation reserves, now the bushland acquisition as we all know started with Sallyanne Atkinson but it was picked up by Jim Soorley and it provided Karawatha Forest. It's got the koala bushlands, the amount of land that's been acquired through this amazing program, now needs to be managed. Madam Chair, I see that we are actually going to spend $1.98 million in relation to managing all of those weeds on those conservation reserves that we've acquired along through the way because what is the point of acquiring that land if we don't maintain it.

So there's community conservation assistance. There's the reserves management program. Now we've all got reserves. We're all going to benefit from the work that is going to be done in relation to that and it's $4.389 million. That's a lot of money. I know that they were doing $242,000 in Mt Coot-tha. We all love Mt Coot-tha. I think Karawatha is terrific. I don't begrudge the fact that money is being spent across all the reserves in Brisbane. It's about us as a whole city and then we come to the minutiae of us Councillors.

I go, my residents go to the bushland up through and walk through Mt Coot-tha. Everyone that comes to Brisbane goes to Mt Coot-tha. They go up to Brisbane Forest Park. They walk up through all the bushland. It's our responsibility as a government to actually fund these things that don't necessarily come down to what's in my ward. I'm appalled today that my last day or second last day of a Council debate, to hear the paucity of debate and the criticism and whining that is going on in respect to actually what's being funded.

Madam Chair, you know, I need to talk about the drainage. I need to talk about we all want to protect the bay. However, the program in relation to drainage, local drainage construction, major drainage construction. Now I've been—I will admit that I rat run through Paddington rather than going down Waterworks Road. So I know Paddington and Red Hill quite well. The amount of money that's been spent over the last five budgets to actually implement major drainage in an 1890s development which had no drainage at all. The last of the drainage on the hill through from Red Hill down through to Milton is in the last piece of drainage.

We talk about houses flooding. We talk about creek flooding. We talk about river flooding. River flooding is a different issue. We all understand that the valves and all of that thing, it's a once in 50 years. It just so happened in 2011 the river flooded after 1974. Now I accept, Madam Chair, and I've been here long enough and you have been long enough here to know that creek flooding floods in a different way. The relationship to how much we manage a 300 millimetres in a day event is actually reflected in what we're going to do in relation to local drainage construction.

So that when it rains in our suburbs and when there's overland flow, we have the drainage capacity that will stop that, will minimise or minimise all of that drainage that occurs. Can you spend it all at once I hear—

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor KNAPP: I hear the Councillor from the other side who has paucity again on her part of the debate in relation to her failing to understand that the schedules and things that are done through the stormwater management is about how we protect most of the city in relation to the one-off event; 50 millimetres in an hour is what our drains will cope with. Any more than 50 millimetres in an hour our drains won't cope. Can you increase the capacity of the drain? We'd all like that but we couldn't afford it.

So the reality is we need to have a consistency in respect to that. I am very pleased about the major vegetation management because as you know, Madam Chair, you and all of us who have these amazing groups that work on the creek and plant the creeks out, we need to have weeds taken out. We need to manage how the creeks actually operate. The dream is to have a creek that has been restored—like some of your creeks—that function in a way a creek should function, Madam Chair.

So I think that the stormwater drains—the gully reconstruction, heavens above, that's an easy thing isn't it? You go out and somebody says there's water running over the road and we look at it and say yes, well we need to put another gully in to take it down through the stormwater to go to the creek. How you manage the creek as that stormwater goes to it is the issue in relation to how you rifle it round so that it actually doesn't—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor KNAPP: —destroy the creeks, Madam Chair. I love the fact, Madam Chair, that all of this budget, all of this budget, recognises how we live in this sustainable city, how we as a Council basically understand that it's our role to actually provide the things, that basic infrastructure. The playgrounds in the parks are terrific. The sporting fields through Councillor ADAMS are terrific. It's the grants we give people. It's the supporting of my groups that go out and work on the creeks.

It is about all of that and, Madam Chair, I can't get over the fact that today I am sitting here listening to, well you haven't done this and you haven't done that, when quite clearly across the city we all benefit, we all benefit by work that's spent. Will I go to Karawatha new bushland? Well I might come and have a visit but I'm very excited about the Mt Coot-tha Visitor Centre because that is where tourists go and we need to encourage tourists into our city.

The Brisbane Botanic Gardens, Mt Coot-tha Botanic Gardens is amazing. Do I regret that it's in my ward that it's not in my ward? Of course I do, I'd love it in my ward. However it's adjacent to my ward and I love going to the gardens. I take visitors to the gardens. I take them down to the foreshores. Did I begrudge that $24 million was spent down in the foreshores as part of this budget in Campbell Newman's time? No, I don't because I go places. I just don't go to the parks in my ward. I just don't go to the—I'm not myopic. I love—I've got grandchildren. Have park will go to.

We love Frew Park. We think Frew Park is terrific. We have cricket games there. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Councillor KNAPP your time has expired.

Councillor DICK.

Councillor DICK: Thanks, Madam Chair, and I rise to speak on Program 1 today and it's an honour to follow on from Councillor KNAPP who has years of experience and wisdom, in particular this portfolio. I note listening to Councillor KNAPP today that when she was in Opposition she just welcomed all, every budget that came down. There were no complaints and there were no issues raised. So as I always say I did learn something from Councillor KNAPP. However, Madam Chair, I want to focus on a few things today in the budget, particularly in service delivery.

The LORD MAYOR and this Council likes to be congratulated and seeks the approval constantly for the job that they've done and we've heard that today through the debate with speaker after speaker. I will come back to some of the items mentioned by LNP Councillors today. My issue is—and I take a different view from Councillor KNAPP—we are sent as advocates and as agents of our local communities to get the best possible deal that we can. Unlike Councillor KNAPP I don't see it as just, well if a park is upgraded on the far north-west of Brisbane that is good for my residents.

Well my residents have sent me here and just as every other Councillor has been elected into this place to get the best possible deal from them out of this Council. Now on any objective view when going through the program and service items, you can see that the LNP say one thing on budget day and one thing during the Council budget. Then for the rest of the year they cut back and then they rollover year after year. That's what happens when you've been in Administration for 12 long years or you've had someone who's been in the Council for 30 years. That's what happens. You get tired, you get lazy and you run out of ideas. So you get into bad habits. That's what I would say.

You only need to look at particular in areas that I'm concerned about, about the areas of flooding and we've had a lot of discussion about that today. It was only a matter of weeks ago that we saw major drainage under Item 1.7.1.5 and also 1.7.1.6 when we saw the items come before in the third budget review that they were cut. Now we also saw an increase in revenue of $2.738 million. So as I said at the time, the Council taking more money in, spending less.

Now that would be okay if we could have some honesty from LNP Councillors to say you know what, we have gone out, we have cut back and we put this money back into this budget. But to simply say, look at us, look at all the new money that we're spending is not the facts. So that's the big concerns that I have. It's not just in Program 1, it's right across the budget. When we saw that budget review come in, Madam Chair, we saw $26 million of capital expenditure rolled over. Now that is a huge amount in anyone's language and there was lots of criticism from the Liberal Party when, the then Liberal Party, when they were in Opposition but now they seem to say well that's okay.

Well we don't say that's good enough, Madam Chair. Listening to the debate today yes, there has been some discussion. I'll have to come back to Councillor KING who right on cue, I took bets, about a minute into the speech she started talking about me so I'll have to return the favour. I was listening closely to what Councillor KING said and she said, no one sat on the grass in King George Square. Did we all hear that? No one sat on the grass in King George—I correct the record she's saying—

Chairman: Councillor KING.

Councillor DICK: Sorry, I should correct the record and I want to be accurate. She said it was always fenced off. So here's a tip, Madam Chair, if you're going to make those claims, you need to be able to back it up. That would be fair. So all you need to do is google people sitting on the grass in King George Square. What do you find? Well, people sitting on the grass in King George Square. All you need to do is google ‘do people sit on the grass in King George Square?’ Here's another picture of people sitting on the grass in King George Square.

So, Madam Chair, I go on. You need to google—

Chairman: Order.

Councillor DICK: Fountains, grass, people sitting in King George Square. What do you have? A fountain, grass and people sitting in King George Square.

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor DICK: Well we've just had the interjection from the DEPUTY MAYOR that we've now built seats for people to sit on. So we've now built seats for people to sit on, concrete, in King Georg Square. Well here's a tip also for the DEPUTY MAYOR, no one sits on them, someone sits on the seats on the concrete in King George Square.

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor DICK: So no one—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor DICK: So you can build all the seats you want, you can build all the concrete you want, no one uses it. No one uses it.

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor DICK: Here we go. So we're going to have the debate today—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor DICK: —on King George Square. Well you know, that's a great debate to have.

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order

Councillor DICK: Because when it comes to—well no one does sit on the seats—are you—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor DICK: Take a stroll down there in the middle of summer—

Councillors interjecting.

Councillor DICK: So the LNP's policy is that King George Square should only be used in winter. That's the only time we should use King George Square, on cloudy days in the middle, on the coldest day of the year, you may find people sitting there. Well done Team QUIRK. Well done. Well done. Because, Madam Chair, I know by listening—

Chairman: Order.

Councillor DICK: —I know by listening to Brisbane residents they do want grass in King George Square and those opposite are anti-fountains. We know that because who can remember the Queen Street Mall fountain, remember that one? Who ripped that out? Who took that out? Of course Campbell Newman. Of course. So when you want to come in here and have a serious debate about what you need to do to improve the accessibility, to improve where people can actually enjoy the CBD, start looking out the front door because only a Labor Administration will ensure that grass is built, will ensure that there is a water feature as part of King George Square. The only people—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor DICK: —talking about that of course is not someone who's been here for 30 years who's in denial just like those opposite. It's Rod Harding, who will ensure that we see grass and a fountain properly restored into King George Square. But, Madam Chair, the other issue for me that I want to talk about today, and we had a little bit of debate today about this, is 1.4.3.1 Parks Maintenance and Enhancement on page 25 of the budget. So we know that there are approximately 3,784 grass cutting complaints up to 8 June this financial year. We know from media reports that grass cutting complaints have more than doubled this financial year.

So, Madam Chair, whilst again the LNP would like a pat on the back for their job of cutting grass we know it's a completely different story out across the city, because you only need to look at some of the media reports which show that this Council was found guilty of issuing a grass mowing contract to a company that didn't own mowers. So we know when you cut $5 million from contract you get this sort of headline; extreme risk; companies get Brisbane's grass cutting contracts. Internal documents have revealed that the Brisbane City Council awarded grass cutting contracts to three companies considered an extreme risk.

We know, Madam Chair, from listening to residents when it comes to 1.4.3.1 Parks Maintenance and Enhancement the LNP are found wanting because they simply can't cut the grass in our city. We've seen that through complaints not only in our own wards but now a record double amount of complaints that have come into the Brisbane City Council. These are publicly accessible documents which now clearly show that the LNP have botched the most basic of services which is of course grass cutting.

We know that there was one case, a supplier in Brisbane's south and surprise, surprise, guess which ward had one of the worst rates of grass cutting? Richlands Ward. In one case a supplier in Brisbane south won a $330,000 roadside cutting contract when the existing rate was nearly $900,000. So in a desperate attempt, in a desperate attempt to save money, all they've done is ultimately cost the ratepayers more by then having to go and clean up this mess. Well we don't say that's good enough. We don't think under 1.4.3.1 on page 25 of the budget residents are getting value for money.

At the end of the day, we all serve here in a privileged capacity and as I come back to my initial remarks, it is our job; it is incumbent on us to go in and fight as hard as we can, which allows me to talk about the Karawatha Environment Centre.

Chairman: Councillor DICK your time has expired.

Councillor DICK: Almost.

Chairman: Councillor McKENZIE?

Councillor McKENZIE: Thanks, Madam Chairman, I rise to speak on Program 1 but first I've just got to make a few comments about what I've been hearing this morning. Look, it comes as no surprise to hear the same old arguments year after year after year from the Opposition. This time we've got carryovers, playing politics, overland flow as a result of the worst downfall in 25 years, grass cuts. My goodness me. When I cut my grass it's shorter if I cut it twice a week than it is if I cut it once a week. We've increased grass cuts. Complaining about officers not doing their job. Not being proactive in doing their job.

I say Councillor SUTTON you should be the one who's out there phoning that mess in, not waiting for the Council to come around to do it. They've got plenty of other things to do. We've seen a liturgy of undated photos being passed around, climate change is not on the agenda? That's hard to believe. Seeking approval from residents; of course the Opposition never try and do that. The ALP never tried to seek approval from their residents. It's just been a cheap shot of show and tell photos we've seen today.

Perhaps some of the thinking people in the Opposition don't understand what the economic problem is. The economic problem is there's always more demands than there is money to meet those demands. We've been meeting added demands from residents year after year and we're doing it in a quiet and effective way. For example this LORD MAYOR has established and implemented polices that combine for the convenience of modern living that our residents expect to obtain.

This Administration measures and minimises carbon producing emissions. For example emissions from Council vehicles, bus and ferries are offset to the purchase of accredited carbon offsets. All electricity directly purchased by Council will continue to be emission free. That is green power. Through the Green Heart program, Council encourages residents, schools, businesses, community groups they're encouraged to change their behaviour and be more carbon and environmentally sensitive. Our Sustainable Brisbane is being achieved through an expenditure of $561,000 this budget.

By protecting the biodiversity of our ecosystems and wildlife whilst allowing people to enjoy the amenities, is an ongoing challenge. This Administration has established a number of well-connected conservation reserves. Also through the Bushland Preservation Levy which was mentioned in some detail, Council is acquiring land of significant biodiversity value to ensure that it will stay in its present state for future generations to enjoy. Our urban forests support recreation, education, economic vitality, waterway health and an outdoor lifestyle to complement our subtropical city.

An example of course is Mt Coot-tha which covers some 8,000 hectares. As well as being a significant green space, it is an enjoyable tourist attraction. Council will expend over $118 million in parks, gardens, recreation in this budget. This includes the maintenance of over 2,000 parks covering 6,000 hectares of urban parks and 9,000 hectares of conservation areas. I look with pride, Madam Chairman, at my parks in the Holland Park Ward; C.B. Mott Park, Glindemann Park, Tarana Street Park and Kanumbra Park, two smaller parks which are receiving upgrades during this Council budget.

Council is now responsible for the Mount Coot-tha Botanic Gardens which has been expanded, Roma Street Parklands and the South Bank Parklands all of which are prime destinations for eco tourists in Brisbane, as well as recreational education and where important horticultural activities are undertaken. Council's tree planting program has resulted in a massive 575,000 street trees which reduce street temperature and provide beautiful street avenues. Although our water emergency has diminished, water conservation and use is always on the agenda in a modern society.

Council's WaterSmart programs want to turn our city into the most water conscious city in Australia. To work towards this goal, this budget, Council continues to engage the community and professional groups to make them aware of how best to conserve and use this precious resource. In addition to the important activities of raising awareness and supporting events of water activities, Council is contributing to the city's stormwater harvesting program in conjunction with the Federal Government.

Thompson Estate sports grounds in Greenslopes and Mott Park, both in my ward of Holland Park, have had water harvesting infrastructure connected which is a great boon for the area, and will provide water to the Annerley Soccer Club and the grounds of the Holland Park Bowls Club and the nearby Mott Park Recreation area.

One of the most important activities of this Council is managing and reducing waste and litter. Working towards zero waste is achieved by our annual kerbside collection; $6.2 million of domestic waste; 32,000 pickups per month, green waste and recyclables. Council operates engineered landfills; the Tip Shop diverts some 350 tonnes from landfill and that costs $1.2 million; transfer stations and resource recovery centres. We encourage residents to reduce, reuse and recycle. Council offers a range of bins to residents to meet their goals. There are significant revenues generated from this recycling, from over $69,500 being taken up in Brisbane alone.

Overall operating expenditures of the city's waste management and reduction in 2015-16 is proposed to be $115 million with revenue of $130 million. However, the ultimate test is the cleanliness of our city, inner cleanliness of our city, is the pride with which most residents have living in a clean and environmentally friendly city. In conclusion I wish to recognise the work of Council officers who work in this area. I'm pleased to support this budget expenditure in Program 1 in this Administration budget. It is without doubt one of the clearest pointers to LORD MAYOR QUIRK's commitment to a healthy and progressive New World City.

Chairman: Further debate?

Councillor CUMMING.

Councillor CUMMING: Yes, thanks, Madam Chair. Madam Chair. I refer to Item 1.9 Waste Management and you probably heard me say this before but Council continues to discriminate against business ratepayers. All ratepayers pay the $296.68 it is per annum for waste management charge; it's page 240 of the budget. However the poor old second class citizen, the business ratepayers only get a general waste bin. They're not entitled to a recycle bin or to pay for a second recycle bin like residential ratepayers.

They're not entitled to a green bin like residential ratepayers. They should be entitled to the same services as residential ratepayers, as they are paying the same amount of money or perhaps they should get a discount in their waste management charge. They're probably getting a service worth probably about 50 per cent of what the residential ratepayers get.

Madam Chairman, the other matter in that Item 1.9 is the cost of kerbside large items collection and the costs seem to be getting out of hand. The amount budgeted for this year is some seven per cent, 7.83 per cent higher than last year and the future cost increases in that item are 3.5 per cent, 3.5 and 4.5 per cent, which on currently the way the economy is running, that would be significantly in excess of the inflation rates. So I'm concerned about the costs being run up and why they're getting so much higher each year.

Also during the information session Councillor McLACHLAN I believe said that Council is starting to struggle to get people who are prepared to take all the green waste that's being supplied. I'm concerned about that as well I don't know what happens when the green waste being generated from green waste bins exceed what they can get suppliers to take. Is it going to just get dumped in the general dumps and generate methane gas? So what's going to happen there?

The other item I'd like to refer to is on stormwater 1.7. We always used to have an item there about stormwater ICP expenditure. We used to list how much was spent on stormwater ICP and have a list of schedules. Then it had another figure of the amount which had been raised by Council through stormwater ICP charges. I guess it was a bit of an easy mark for the Opposition because the amount that it raised in revenue always far exceeded the amount being spent each financial year.

This is obviously, Madam Chairman, the developers I guess who are being ripped off. Money for their projects was being taken from them and it was being spent in other parts of the city but this year I guess it's got a bit inconvenient for the Administration for this point to be made each year so now they've taken the figure out. But they haven't identified now the infrastructure charge amount. It says stormwater infrastructure; not stormwater, ICP infrastructure. So it's presumably now other than ICP as well goes in there. The amount for the revenue raised has disappeared.

Now we were told during information sessions that the amount for revenue had been transferred to 1.7.2.5 but the figure shown there was only $9.62 million. Now in the last year's budget, the figure was, for this financial year for ICP revenue for stormwater was shown to be $13.714 million. So if that's the case, that means that the revenue expected this year is 32.5 per cent less than what it was anticipated to be last year. Now that really does take some explaining.

I haven't heard anyone saying that the amount of development in the city of Brisbane is going to collapse so that the revenue coming in from ICP charges will be declining by such a large amount. So I'd like some explanation of that.

There are some other interesting and disappointing figures in flood risk management, $1.7 million. The planning for future infrastructure has been greatly reduced from $6.9 million in capital in 2014-15 to poultry $3.902 in 2015-16. That's a 43.5 per cent discount—fall, sorry. That, to me, means that the Administration has stopped planning new projects. That's a very short-sighted approach and in the long term could be a disastrous approach.

Also in relation to service 1.7.2.2, maintain and rehabilitate open drainage, there's also been a big drop. $7.535 million was budgeted for 2014-15, but only $6.47 million spent. No wonder Council was receiving so many complaints about overgrown drains with a drop of 14 per cent of the funds spent on this activity. Mitigate flooding, 1.7.2.4, the project cyclic de-silting of waterways and draining disappears. So I'm interested to know what's happening there.

The other item in 1.7.2.6, reconstruct gullies sees another big drop in capital expenditure. This is one of the most practical areas of Council responsibility and expenditure. In 2014-15 it was budgeted at $1.541 million and sadly in 2015-16 it's down to $1.364, a drop of 11.49 per cent. So, on these items, the LNP budget means down, down, down for drainage expenditure, despite the frequency of extreme weather events going up, up and up. So only a couple of months ago I think we had a one in 200 year storm, so it's a great shame for this Administration to be cutting expenditure in that area.

In relation to the schedules under this Program 1, there's one that I'd like to comment on. It's page 151.6.3.1, Davenport Drive, Manly's got $174,000 for a fishing platform, and this is great news. This is great news, especially because we've been waiting for it for about 10 years since Campbell Newman first promised it. So, my heart leapt and I excitedly rang up my fishing contact and said, mate, the money's in the budget. The money's in the budget. This is my local—not Councillor FLESSER.

I said, the money's in the budget, $174,000, it looks like the fishing platform's going to be done after all this time. He said, great, I'll just contact my contact in the Council and just confirm that. He got back to me and said—and they said, that'll only cover the first stage. I thought, oh no, you're joking. You're joking, after—

Councillor CUMMING: After all that time—and of course this is pre-election expenditure, this might be a hope for a bit of PR for someone down the track. So I've got no faith, unfortunately, for the second half. So I'm worried we'll end up with a fishing platform with a—they'll be building the platform somewhere but there'll be no pylons to put it on, or else they'll build the pylons and there'll be no platform. It'll be a place for the birds to sit on.

Councillor CUMMING: Well yes, to be fair, the local pelicans, they're entitled to somewhere to sit and if they get a new place to sit, that could be a good thing. But look, I just ask the LORD—and I know he's not here, but I just want to put on the record I'm asking the LORD MAYOR, look, fund the second stage as well mate and get it all done this financial year. I'll come down with you and help you launch this great initiative, this great fishing platform.

Councillor CUMMING: I'll even borrow a rod or a reel or a hand-line off of Councillor FLESSER and we'll go down there, see who can catch the first fish; myself or the LORD MAYOR. So a good expenditure for Wynnum Manly but disappointing that it's only the first stage again, thank you.

Chairman: Further debate?

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR.

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of Program 1 of the 2015-16 Council Budget. Madam Chairman, I just have to set the record straight. I need to put some facts on the table before we proceed into discussing all the wonderful things in this program area. Madam Chairman, at exactly 11:50am this morning when Councillor DICK was on his feet in the Chamber making the statement that no one sits in King George Square, I have photographic evidence which proves on a small section of King George Square, 17 people were sitting and there were more—

Councillors interjecting.

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: There were more but they were obscured by the foliage of the trees in King George Square, Madam Chairman.

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: Here we have some evidence, Madam Chairman. So that is the fact. There are people sitting—there are people sitting—

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: Yes, Councillor DICK, we will frame it as a going away present for you, no problems there. Madam Chairman, can I also address some of Councillor ABRAHAMS'—so we've got a departing Opposition leader, the current Deputy Leader of the Opposition made an insulting comment of pork barrelling in regards to park projects and projects across this program area.

This is an insult to the Council officers who work behind the scenes, who put forward—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: —a lot of projects from their priority list. Not every project is put forward by a Councillor in this place. I know that the Council officers behind the scenes work incredibly hard and it is insulting because you've just had one of your members of your side of this Chamber get up and say, thank you for the fishing platform, the first stage that's going through.

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: We have the Shorncliffe Pier that's going through in 2015-16, $6.491 million worth and yet you're not acknowledging that that is not pork barrelling; that is addressing needs across this city, Madam Chairman.

Councillors interjecting.

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: You have the former leader of the Labor opposition in this place get up and talk about cuts and carry on. What does she want to do? She wants to cut the litter munching machines and make our Council officers use brooms. Shame, Madam Chairman. They forget some of the things that they say and do in this place. Who was it that approved the King George Square redevelopment? It was a Labor dominated Civic Cabinet in this place.

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: Let's remember the facts. Let's remember the facts. Whilst we're on the facts in this place—whilst we're on the facts of this place, let's look at what happened post the 2011 floods, and let's not get into the politics of envy as the Councillor for Tennyson has done, and making the statement that some wards are so heavily provided with projects and others are being ignored. What happened after the 2011 floods? Whose ward got the majority of the funding for restoration projects, to build communities back up after the floods? It was the ward of Tennyson, Madam Chairman.

So let's be truthful—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: I'm going to correct the record as well. Councillor GRIFFITHS made an incorrect inference that I was agreeing with him. I certainly did not and I certainly can speak for myself in this place. I don't need him making any inferences and making them incorrectly.

Madam Chairman, I would like to speak in support of this program area. In particular when we go back to 1.3.1, growing the conservation reserve network, and I was quite appalled at the Councillor for Tennyson's amendment that she put forward because there are critical conservation reserves through our city, and in particular I speak of the Sergeant Dan Stiller Memorial Reserve and I am grateful for that being in my ward and I am grateful that it acknowledges a great man who contributed his service to our city and our state and it is an environmental reserve that is reflected to honour his name. There is $261,000 for fire preparedness and also the conservation reserve management, because that area is growing, Madam Chairman, and there's about another 80 hectares to be added onto it shortly.

Madam Chairman, in respect of outcome 1.4, parks, gardens and recreation, I would like to reflect on the Forest Lake Amphitheatre and the new memorial, the RSL memorial that is in that place. We did a major refurbishment and that has been extremely well received by the local community. Just reflecting on page 23 and some of the statements in there; Brisbane's parks and public open spaces reflect our subtropical lifestyle and are available to all. The acquisition and embellishment of parkland across the city responds to patterns of population growth and development and the demand for a range of outdoor activities through sound and positive effective network planning.

As Brisbane grows, community appreciation of and need for accessible public parks with a greater diversity of facilities becomes more evident. Council is committed to maximising community benefit from our green and open space and will continue to deliver an accessible and connected network. Also, that we, when we're dealing with our urban parks, adopt a planned approach to improving existing parks, to optimise community benefits and meet the diverse recreational and cultural needs of an ever-increasing population.

Madam Chairman, there are a number of park improvements in my ward, but particularly when I look at program area 1.4.3.1, maintaining the lake systems in the parks. Before I was elected, how much funding was there to do this in the budget from previous Administrations? Zero, zilch, nada, nothing. So, Madam Chairman, I am pleased to not only see there is funding, not only in this year's budget, but also in the forwards. Because I know, pre-being elected that the Forest Lake lake was like a carpet of weeds across the top of it. Can I say, Councillor BOURKE, through you, Madam Chair, that the residents are extremely pleased that it is now very clear and we have regular weed maintenance over there.

I'd also like to reflect in regards to the park infrastructure. The Forest Lake Boulevard toilets on the sports field side will be upgraded to meet Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) compliance for $242,000. We will also see play safe upgrades in Lakewood Avenue Park. We will also see, in Calamvale District Park a new innovative extension to the toilets there. Which will certainly be very well appreciated by the local community and families. Also Regents Circuit Park at Forest Lake will be receiving a $50,000 improvement as well.

Now for Councillors on that other side to say that the south side gets nothing, well it's interesting because both of those two Councillors that have made those comments, they have the Oxley Creek running through their wards and funnily enough, on page 33, Madam Chairman, of the budget, there is the Oxley Creek Improvement program. Madam Chairman, this side of the Chamber takes waterways enhancement very seriously and certainly I appreciate the work that the Council officers in this area have been undertaking in respect of Billabong Place and the $251,000 that is going to deal with some of the weed and erosion management that we have there, just to enhance that are for local residents.

Madam Chairman, in relation to service 1.7.1.2, I would just like to congratulate all of the officers that have been involved in the All Hazards Brisbane Ready for Summer campaign. This is a very important project across our city and it cannot be underestimated. Certainly that is one of the ways that we really do cut through and have a lot of preventative measures in place when we do get major storm events.

Madam Chairman, my ward has also just recently had the annual kerb side large-item collection. I say thank you for the continuation of that. It really does make a big difference and certainly having the resource recovery centre at Willawong is a great bonus to my ward as well. It is something that certainly goes a long way to managing waste across out city. Particularly, I'd like to acknowledge the green waste collection service which is growing at 35 bins a day and keeping 18,000 tons of green waste out of landfill. This is a significant impact for our landfill situation across our city.

Madam Chairman, I'd also like to express my appreciation for the extension of the grass cutting from 17 to 19 cuts per year. This is going to make a major difference to a lot of our parks and certainly our suburbs.

Chairman: Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR, your time has expired.

Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Further debate?

Councillor BOURKE would you like to sum up?

Councillor BOURKE: Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. I just want to thank all Councillors for their contribution and I'm just going to touch on a few of the points that were raised through the debate. The problem I have is I just don't know where to begin, Madam Chairman, because the Labor Party gave us a lot of absolute gems, Madam Chairman, in terms of some of the comments that they made and the contributions that they put on the record, thanks to Hansard.

So, I might start with Councillor CUMMING. Councillor CUMMING has been in this place for a decade and a half and fails to understand basic arithmetic, Madam Chairman. He referred to page 41 and the movement of the revenue expense line items into this particular part from the infrastructure charges collected from stormwater. Councillor CUMMING can't take a negative number and add a positive number to it and come up without a reduction. So every year there's always been a negative line item attributed to this particular part of the budget. But this year, for the first time, it's a positive.

So if you take the $5 million that was shown last year, the minus $5 million that was shown last year, and add $14 million to it, you get the positive $9 million that's there this year, Madam Chairman. It's basic arithmetic. Really simple, basic arithmetic but that's another reason, Madam Chairman, another demonstration of why you can't trust the numbers that the Labor Party put forward.

On the issue of business recycling, Madam Chairman, Councillor CUMMING delivered his stump speech, every year we say it's against national consumer competition policy, Council would have a monopoly that we can't have in that space, Madam Chairman, but the Labor Party continues to seem to want to go down this line. Madam Chairman, Councillor DICK's contribution was his standard stump speech, the sooner he's out the door, I think for Councillor DICK, the better in this place, Madam Chairman.

He talked about King George Square and Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR smacked him down, I think is the best way of putting it, because there are people out there right now. There's people out sitting in King George Square right now, on the seats, Madam Chairman. Anyone can pull out a picture they want, here's pictures of King George Square with the grass fenced off, the little chain fence, the other fence, Madam Chairman. We can pull out pictures to prove anything, Madam Chairman. There they are, the pictures of King George Square fenced off.

Madam Chairman, Councillor ABRAHAMS, she spent five minutes talking about climate change and the dirty great big tax that the Australian Labor Party like to implement when it comes to cleaning up or dealing with the issue of climate change. But their great contribution—

Councillor ABRAHAMS: Point of order, Madam Chair.

Chairman: Point of order against you, Councillor BOURKE.

Yes, Councillor ABRAHAMS.

Councillor ABRAHAMS: Claim to be misrepresented.

Chairman: Thank you.

Councillor BOURKE: Their great contribution, and those opposite's great contribution to the debate of climate change in this place is sign Kyoto Now, we all remember that wonderful campaign where they stood there with a piece of paper going, LORD MAYOR, sign Kyoto Now. There's Councillor FLESSER and Councillor NEWTON, they're leaving this place, Madam Chairman, but obviously they—we couldn't sign it at the time, Councillor MURPHY.

But the best one from Councillor ABRAHAMS, and this is an absolute purler, Madam Chairman, Councillor ABRAHAMS stood up and talked about the play safe upgrade schedule in this year's budget and the 12 projects and only one of them being in a Labor Party ward and the other 11 being in an LNP ward. Now I don't know if Councillor ABRAHAMS has a crystal ball and is thinking forward to 20 March next year, but D J Sherrington Park's in Inala, so unless she's giving that seat away to us next year, Madam Chairman—I know the Leader of the Opposition in waiting, already given up on Richlands Ward. Councillor DICK, you're not even out the door and she's already given up on Richlands Ward.

But it gets better. It gets better. Joseph Lee Park in Zillmere, that's in Deagon. She's already given up on Deagon as well, Madam Chairman. Just for the trifecta, Shaw Estate Park in Wavell Heights in Northgate, she's already given up on that too, Madam Chairman. She's given up on her three Labor colleagues who are retiring. Well, well done. Well done, Councillor ABRAHAMS.

Chairman: Order.

Councillor BOURKE: Through you, Madam Chairman, to Councillor ABRAHAMS, well done. Showing the great support that you have for your colleagues there who are retiring, Councillor ABRAHAMS, giving up those seats already.

Madam Chairman, Councillor SUTTON talked about the lack of money that we're spending on flood studies. I went through at great length in my introduction around the studies that were already completed and how this Council's taking the issue of flooding seriously. Councillor SUTTON said that we're lacking Councillor Soorley's vision—it's a direct quote—lacking Soorley's vision. Well, Madam Chairman, if Councillor Soorley's vision was headlines like, flood cover up, Council slashes millions from waterway funding, Beattie tries to bail out Council, City Hall kept facts from residents, report they refused to release.

If this is the vision of Councillor Soorley when it comes to dealing with flooding in this city, Madam Chairman, I'm glad we don't have Councillor Soorley's vision on this city of the Chamber. Because we actually have an honest conversation with people about flooding. We honestly have an informed conversation and we're completing the necessary flood studies and the necessary work to protect residents and inform them when they're deciding on how they're going to build their homes, how they're going to go about their business, Madam Chairman, when it comes to development but also when they're living their general lives, Madam Chairman.

The Labor Party are the ones who in their last budget, when you go to their last budget book, 2003-04, didn't actually allocate one brass razoo, not a single cent to flood studies. Not a single cent to flood studies, Madam Chairman. So for them to stand up in this place and criticise us after we've delivered over two dozen creek or flood study deliverables in the last couple of years, Madam Chairman, is nothing short of hypocritical at its best, Madam Chairman. Hypocritical at its best.

Madam Chairman, Councillor GRIFFITHS stood up and woe is me’d about Oxley Creek and how it's terrible, Madam Chairman, that Council's not investing more. He obviously didn't get as far as page 33 in the budget, as Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR outlines, there's a specific line item. A specific line item called the Oxley Creek Improvement Project. But Councillor GRIFFITHS obviously didn't get that far into the budget, Madam Chairman.

Because if he had, and if he'd bothered turning up to the information sessions, Madam Chairman, he could have asked me questions about it and I would have been able to detail the work that we're actually undertaking in Oxley Creek to help improve not only the water quality, but sediment issues, Madam Chairman.

Councillor BOURKE: Madam Chairman, Councillor JOHNSTON tried to—Councillor JOHNSTON tried to rewrite the Council budget by allocating money collected by the bushland acquisition levy. So we know that Councillor JOHNSTON doesn't support bushland acquisition, she now wants to spend that money on drainage projects, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor BOURKE: Then—yes, she does, is what the interjection was, through you, Madam Chairman, yes she does. Well, Madam Chairman, Councillor JOHNSTON selectively hears what she wants to hear, puts those words together in a sentence and then tries to quote it back in this Council Chamber, and she did that in her speech in this place about some of the figures that I used.

So I talked about the schedules and 95 per cent of the schedule projects being delivered in the suburbs. Councillor JOHNSTON talked about all of the program area with 95 per cent. So just to set the record straight, 95 per cent of the scheduled projects are being delivered in the suburbs, Madam Chairman.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor BOURKE: Out there in the suburbs for the residents of Brisbane. If Councillor JOHNSTON has progress that she wants to fund, well I suggest Councillor JOHNSTON you use that wonderful fund that the LORD MAYOR introduced that wasn't here under a Labor Party Administration, that the LORD MAYOR introduced—

Councillors interjecting.

Chairman: Councillor JOHNSTON.

Councillor BOURKE: —which was the $448,000—

Chairman: Just a minute, Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor JOHNSTON, if you continue to interject like that, you will be warned.

Thank you, Councillor BOURKE.

Councillor BOURKE: The $448,000 ward footpath and parks trust fund, Madam Chairman. If there's such a pressing, urgent issue for Councillor JOHNSTON that she wants to do, I'd suggest that she use the money available to her there to complete that lighting project that she was talking about.

Madam Chairman, and I'm going to finish with the Karawatha environment centre, because the Labor Party choose to rewrite history and try to rewrite history and rewrite history when it comes to the Karawatha environment park. So, back in 1996, Karawatha Forest Management Plan, which was developed by the Karawatha Forest Advisory Committee, which was chaired by Councillor Gail McPherson, first mooted the Karawatha Discovery Centre or environment centre. So, 1996, Jim Soorley was Lord Mayor.

So from there through to 2004 until Campbell Newman became Lord Mayor, Councillor McPherson did nothing. Councillor McPherson, the Labor Councillor did nothing. Councillor ABRAHAMS as the Chair for Environment, Parks and Sustainability did nothing, right? So we get to 2008, while Councillor FLESSER was happy to talk about the Romans, Madam Chairman, well the Romans never had to deal with Councillor McPherson in their 2000 year history.

Because Councillor McPherson, all she had to do was go out to her community and get some consensus about where this thing should go and where the road should go and how the access should be, and she couldn't do it. The Romans used slave labour, I think, and we know that the Labor Party are happy to sell workers' rights down the drains, thank you Bill Shorten, but, Madam Chairman, we on this side of the Chamber have taken a different approach. We are on track to deliver this particular project now that Councillor MARX has been there to actually work with the Administration, work with the residents, work with the Friends of the Karawatha Forest Society and get the project on track to be delivered.

So when the Labor Party talks about this project, you need to know the history is a sad, sorry tale for the Australian Labor Party who could not deliver on something that they mentioned over 20 years ago first. One of their ideas, one of their principles, Madam Chairman. So, in closing, Madam Chairman, I commend Program 1 to the Chamber. It is a solid program, built on delivering the commitments of this Administration, of the LORD MAYOR and building on previous budgets.

In closing, I just want to say thank you to all of the Council officers in my own branch in Council and also in Councillor McLACHLAN's area who are our delivery partners across so much of what we do. I commend Program 1 to the Chamber.

Chairman: I will put the motion for the adoption of the Clean, Green and Water Smart—

Councillor ABRAHAMS: Madam Chair.

Chairman: Sorry, Councillor ABRAHAMS; yes, misrepresentation.

Councillor ABRAHAMS: Yes, the Chair said very clearly that I referred to the Federal Carbon Tax. That was not true. I did not. In fact, what I did refer to was the contribution from the Federal Government to assist us in the LED lights project. Madam Chair, I take this opportunity to give my apology to the Chamber for my inaccuracy on the wards. Obviously I have to get out of West End a little more.

Chairman: Thank you, Councillor ABRAHAMS.