Page 2484 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 14 November 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Kaine: It follows a ballistic trajectory.
MR MOORE: With an interesting trajectory; you are right. I have taken this opportunity to present some negative aspects of the multifunction polis site. I did pre-empt the speech by saying that I support it but that I was not going to run over it and just give it a glowing report. I have some particular environmental concerns about it. I do not think they are of the calibre that would necessarily stop the project, but they are very reasonable and sensible concerns. They must become a major area of interest in any further move in relation to a feasibility study on this because, if the environmental factors mean that it is not feasible, we should come to that conclusion as quickly as we can.
DR KINLOCH (3.52): May I immediately pick up one of Mr Moore's interesting points and ask you to look at the map on page 45. In addition to those other two technological marvels, we have a twin-winged prop plane, so there is something for the nostalgia buffs in this report.
Mrs Grassby: You can have a balloon too, if you like.
DR KINLOCH: Right. I join in a general appreciation of the project and also in some of the criticisms of it. I also recognise, as Mr Moore and Mr Kaine have, the temporary nature of this document; that is, it is obviously a draft document. I would like to come back to that in a minute. So let us welcome the project. I join Mr Kaine, Mr Duby and Mr Moore and, in particular, I endorse Mr Jensen's comments, some of his imaginative proposals and his comments about Albury-Wodonga.
There is a series of what I might call hiccups about this report. I hope these comments will be helpful to the group that takes this temporary, draft document and produces the final document. I congratulate the team for producing what is essentially a temporary document and not polishing it up, not changing all the things that need to be changed, so that we can have a chance to criticise it in this way.
On the question of the photographs and the image of Canberra, might I suggest there is one area that has been omitted altogether. That is the cosmopolitanism of our city in terms of religious and national structures. Could there be another page which perhaps could include, especially for our Asian friends who need to read this document, a Japanese garden and the Indonesian Embassy and, in terms of religion, the Greek Orthodox Church, a Muslim mosque, the new Chinese Embassy - not in terms of religion but in terms of the range of material in the city - the Thai Embassy, St Andrew's Church, the City Uniting Church, and Black Friars in Watson. That is one area that is omitted from the report in terms of lifestyle. I would very much like to see that added.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .