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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 14 Hansard (10 December) . . Page.. 5120 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

$12 million the territory had already received would be affected. It was no real answer and, clearly, no real attempt was made to review the situation.

Finally, in this minimal history of disorderly progress, I acknowledge the points made in report No 5 of the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment which was released in August 2002. The committee asked, first, for a community land use overlay on blocks adjacent to the proposed Griffin Centre so that it was possible to identify future need. The government appears to have totally ignored that report. I have not been able to find any government response to that report even though I have asked the secretariat for one. It is worth paying regard to that issue now.

Since 1997 very little has been spent on a building that is due for replacement. A wasteland of road works makes work inside the building difficult and gaining access to the building is a challenge. Just last week I spoke to a friend in a wheelchair who is not able to use the disabled toilet at night. It is too dangerous for him to go to the back of the building in the dark. As a result he can no longer attend meetings at the Griffin Centre at night. The existing Griffin Centre enables a number of uses, some of which are subtler than others.

Key social services include the free food program run by a number of organisations such as the Red Cross and the Hare Krishna society, and the Canberra Alliance for Harm Minimisation and Advocacy runs the needle and syringe program. Organisations such as the Women's Information Resources and Education on Drugs and Dependency, the Mental Health Consumer Network, Mission Heart, the Ethnic Communities Council, the Community Information and Referral Centre and Radio 2XX have a large number of clients or participants who would like to be able to access services or support with some degree of independence and discretion.

In addition, a number of smaller groups and associations have their home in the centre. Many others hire the workshop meeting and rehearsal rooms. At present room hire is dropping off because of the intrusive roadwork environment. If the Griffin Centre were an independent business undoubtedly its needs would be met and some form of compensation would be paid for the loss of business while building works were proceeding. However, as the Griffin Centre is a community based facility it basically has to wear it.

We are debating this motion in order to address the more intractable problem that has emerged due to the failure of successive governments to take a strategic approach to accommodation issues. The replacement Griffin Centre will have a much more limited footprint. At this stage a significant proportion of the ground floor plan is reserved as a large meeting or function room. Clearly, the operating model for the centre-a community use model-would be dependent on a significant proportion of the income generated from room hire. It has been put to me that it is consequently impossible for the centre to continue to host the free food program because the people who depend on it would get in the way of other hirers.

It has also been suggested that people who take advantage of the services provided by organisations such as CAHMA and Mission Heart will intrude on others at the new centre. Given the fact that the centre will have a common foyer and shared facilities with no discrete entrances, the centre will not be viable. The government might argue that that

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