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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (6 December) . . Page.. 3792 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Again, the parliamentary triangle is a superb ensemble of architecture and landscape. It does illustrate a significant stage of human history, particularly the foundation of the federal capital and of the federation of this nation, and it does indeed meet the test of authenticity in design and setting. Outside of Washington, Canberra was the second city designed and planned as a federal capital.

Mr Speaker, what would World Heritage listing mean? First of all, it would give weight to what we all know and already recognise and what is already known round the world. Canberra is visited already by many people internationally to see landscape and town planning in action, a result rather than a theory. What would it mean for the central area, the triangle, the parliamentary zone and the broader setting? It would mean that we would have to have appropriate guidelines in place for the management of the area. It would not mean that the city would be frozen in time, never to be changed, never a new building to be built.

In other World Heritage sites the key requirement is that there are appropriate management regimes in place to ensure that the place continues to be looked after and enhanced as the city grows and develops. That is certainly what we have already in Canberra. The National Capital Authority provides an appropriate legislative framework for the management of the central area. The Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital provides an important oversight of that management function. Areas where the Territory Plan applies are also appropriately overseen by mechanisms both in this place and through the broader community. We have the mechanisms already to address that key criteria that the place must have effective management mechanisms in place.

World Heritage listing would be the final step in recognising the significance of Burley Griffin's plan and the influence of Sulman, Weston and others in the development of Australia's federal capital. It would be a fitting tribute, as we lead up to 100 years since the establishment of Canberra in a decade or so, that we are recognised internationally on the World Heritage List as a place of outstanding universal value unique in the world.

I understand that the government wishes to adjourn debate on this motion today. I have to express my regret that the government did not approach me earlier seeking further clarification of some of the issues that will lead to the adjournment of the debate. I did write to all members advising them of my intention to move this motion and inviting them to seek further clarification should they feel it was necessary.

But that said, Mr Speaker, this should be an issue above politics. This should be an issue about recognising the pre - eminence of our city as a planned city, outstanding in its 20^th century context. For that reason, I am prepared to accept the adjournment of the debate today, but I urge members to give serious consideration to this issue. Heritage is not just about natural beauty; it is about beauty created by human hand as well. It is fitting that we consider Canberra for those criteria in the context of the significance of Griffin's plan and those who followed afterwards in implementing it and in its realisation.

Debate (on motion by Mr Smyth ) adjourned to the next sitting.

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