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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 June 2004) . . Page.. 2293 ..

toilets in Parliament House. In a quiet time, the Parliament House building can accommodate 3,000 people and in sitting weeks up to 5,000. Taking the more conservative number of 3,000, that means that, if the single flush toilets were replaced with three to six-litre dual flush toilets, there would be 33 million litres of water saved.

Will you write to the secretary to the Department of Parliamentary Services expressing grave concern about this flagrant waste of water and asking that there be an immediate conversion to dual flush toilets in Parliament House, so that the department takes responsibility for its water use and does not impose a totally unnecessary burden on the ACT?

MR STANHOPE: Thank you, Ms Tucker, for the question. Certainly, the government has identified through the water strategy, which has been released and which we are now actively implementing, the role that sewerage and water used within the house plays in the overall consumption of water by the community. Certainly, we acknowledge and recognise, as everyone who has thought about the subject does, the part that can be played by converting single flush toilets to dual flush toilets, converting our traditional shower heads to AAA-rated shower heads, and the other work that we can do in our homes and gardens.

I think it needs to be said that, while I do not dispute the case that you make in relation to Parliament House, it is almost certainly the case that five times as much water as is used within Parliament House is used in the grounds of Parliament House to irrigate the very extensive gardens that are very much part and parcel of the federal Parliament House.

The point is taken, however, and we, as the ACT government, would hope that, over time, within those buildings for which we are responsible, we can convert the plumbing to a water efficient standard and that we can make all of those same adjustments ourselves in relation to ACT government-controlled buildings. It is the case that, here in the ACT, with the Commonwealth as the major landlord or the major employer, there is a very significant role for the Commonwealth to play in both the retrofitting and outfitting of buildings that it occupies, as well as the way in which it uses water outside of its buildings.

There is an issue that we are now beginning to pursue, of course, in relation to what we require as fuel and water efficient standards and ratings in all of our buildings. I have just recently asked the head of the Chief Minister’s Department to institute a process in relation to all future leasings by the ACT government, so that we impose standards in relation to the utilisation of power, the standard of fittings and the extent to which water saving is a feature of any building that we occupy. Regarding our own responsibility as a government, an employer and a hirer of buildings, we will insist that we only rent or lease buildings of a certain standard.

I am more than happy to write to the Prime Minister and ask him to join in partnership with the ACT government in the implementation of the water strategy.

MS TUCKER: When you write regarding the toilets in Parliament House, would you also inquire as to the measures that are being taken to ensure the least water usage in other Commonwealth buildings in Canberra?

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