Page 2162 - Week 08 - Thursday, 10 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR HUMPHRIES (10.56): Madam Speaker, I welcome the general tenor of this report. I believe that it does provide at the end of the day for a considerably upgraded level of accommodation for the ACT Assembly. As one of those who have persevered with this building for some time, it is useful to know that others quickly concede that this building is not up to the purpose of a parliamentary building of any kind.
I think, Madam Speaker, that I might put on record my disappointment that more attention was not given to the question that I raised in my own submission about the use of the old provisional Parliament House. People's views are well known on that subject and therefore there is not much point in going back over that argument. It does distress me - I suppose on another side of this question - that that building remains unused and unoccupied at present, substantially anyway, and that as an important part of the heritage of this city it continues to deteriorate. I certainly hope that some government, whether it is the ACT Government or the Federal Government, is able to make a decision soon about putting that building to appropriate use.
It is unfortunate, Madam Speaker, that it is not possible within the new Assembly framework to provide some hospitality both to members and to guests of members and visitors to the ACT. Clearly we are much too small a place to afford a parliamentary dining room or parliamentary members bar or non-members bar or whatever. I think that the Northern Territory enjoys some of those facilities, but I do not think that the Northern Territory is a very good model for us to use.
Mr De Domenico: Their facilities are not appropriate.
MR HUMPHRIES: No. The $80m that I understand they are spending in that place certainly goes well beyond what the people of the ACT would be prepared to wear. Indeed, I suspect that even the $13m being spoken of here is going to greatly try many people's patience with the Assembly.
Nonetheless, I think we have to stand by the view, if we hold that view, that it is important to be able to provide for members carrying on work within the building when it is not possible for them to get out of the building for various reasons. Sometimes work demands that you do not take a long time for lunch or dinner and to be able to have access to some eating facilities, for example, is very helpful. I therefore welcome the recommendation that there be some public eating facility, a coffee shop or whatever, within the building for use by the public and by members of the Assembly. That would be, I believe, a valuable way of providing some accessible and affordable means of refreshment for members in particular, and obviously also for members of the public. I am sure that that establishment will be very well patronised if it is up to standard.
Madam Speaker, I hope that we can establish a consensus on what needs to be done and on how quickly it needs to be done to provide the ACT Assembly with a suitable home. That would be, in my opinion, a small way of bringing self-government into a focus which is acceptable to more Canberrans than perhaps is the case at present or was the case three years ago. Having a place that people understand and recognise as being the home of the Assembly would make it more accessible. I still, when speaking to people on the telephone, have to tell
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .