Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 5 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 1515 ..

MR HIRD (continuing):

from 27 to 29 July this year. The organisation of the conference, Mr Speaker, was a credit to Mr Paul Crittenden, MP, chair of the New South Wales Public Works Committee, and to his parliamentary colleagues and staff of that committee of the New South Wales Parliament.

In keeping with past conferences, the conference was split into three components: A site inspection, a series of talks by experts in the areas of public works and the environment, and a session devoted to updates by each parliamentary committee on what it had been doing during the period since the last conference. Each session was both interesting and informative for all those members who attended, in particular my colleagues Mr Dave Rugendyke and Mr Simon Corbell.

The site inspection was at the Homebush Olympic site, which is truly impressive. Until recently it was described as the biggest building site in the world. Delegates to the conference were shown the showground facilities, the indoor pool, the massive Olympic stadium, the Olympic village and the associated environmental works. A feature of the site inspection was the widespread use of surveillance cameras in public places in New South Wales. A brief reference is made to this matter in the report I table today.

The session involving visiting experts was devoted to road and rail transport in the twenty-first century. Among other matters, it involved talks on trends in public transport, the role of private enterprise in land transport, and environmental imperatives in transport. I found it challenging. I might add that also challenging was the forthright expression of views by the chair of the Commonwealth Public Works Committee, Mr Wilson Tuckey. In his inimitable style, he stimulated debate and challenged conventional assumptions.

During the session on each committee's activities, I was struck by the extent to which environmental considerations affect decisions about public works. These two areas are very much interrelated in today's world. I was also interested in the diversity of work under way by the parliamentary committees across Australia. Some examples are uranium scrutiny, by the Northern Territory Environment Committee; and the design of school buildings in New South Wales and the nature of the State's development and approval process, by the New South Wales Public Works Committee. Members will note that New South Wales took the blueprint from the ACT in their efforts on this program. Further examples are analysis of the problems caused by weed and ballast water in Victoria, by the Victorian Environment Committee; challenging the Government to better justify public works, utilising net present value analysis, by the South Australian Public Works Committee; and the problems of financing the restoration costs of heritage public infrastructure in Tasmania.

In conclusion, I stress again the great value of the conference to me as a parliamentarian and as chair of the Urban Services Committee. I think I speak for my colleagues in saying that we learnt a tremendous amount in a short time. For each of the members of my committee, this was our first public works and environment conference, and we have no hesitation in recommending it in all respects.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .