Page 2149 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 6 June 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
no increase in charges. That is not surprising, because they fear that when they are pushed into a new building the charges will be so high that they will be frozen out. They fear that the charges will be beyond movements in the CPI, because that is the nature of this Government. It is a developers' government. It will hand it over to the developers. They do not know what is going to happen in three years because this is an off-the-cuff reaction to the community which was on their back. They have not thought it through at all. All other terms would have been conducive to the ongoing operations of the community organisations who utilise the facilities of the Griffin Centre.
I support this motion because what it means is security for the Griffin Centre and for the community services it provides. This is what the Labor Party stands for. It stands for security for the users of that community centre and security for the services which those organisations will continue to provide well into the future, and - dare I say it - under a Labor administration. This flea-bitten Government opposite has been peppered by a broadside from community groups and it will remain well in focus for its activities in relation to the delivery of community services.
A three-year licence is not good enough. It does not guarantee tenure for the occupants of the Griffin Centre. There is nothing guaranteed for the occupants of that centre. In the clear light of day, I do not think that the occupants of the Griffin Centre will cop what has been delivered. They will wake up to the fact that there has been a snow job and I am sure that they will take a firm stand to ensure that those important features which were outlined in their motion are secured in the interests of community groups; not secured for or given away to property developers at some point in the future.
It is well known that the Residents Rally has watered down its stand on property development so that it can line up with the Liberal Party. Of course, there has been a very comfortable amalgamation of views there in relation to property development. It is not surprising, therefore, that such an important building as the Griffin Centre has been placed at risk and, more importantly, the services have been placed at risk by the activities of the Government opposite. This Government is not trusted by the community. It is not trusted by the community groups and it is not trusted by the Friends of the Griffin Centre. I am confident that those organisations that deliver the important services that are provided from the Griffin Centre will work hard to keep this Government opposite honest. I was just waiting for Mr Jensen to jump up and say that, by implication, that meant they were dishonest, but he was a bit slow off the mark this time.
They will work hard to keep the Government honest. They will need to work hard, because this Government is about
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .