Page 558 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 14 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Since the minister was unable to detail yesterday what progress has been made in processing these sites, I assume the property evaluation, options papers and cost-benefit analysis are yet to be completed. The government has no time frame for deciding on these sites, and members of the community, including the Greens, are requesting that the sites not be sold until after the 2008 election. It seems appropriate, though, that some sites are leased out on a short to medium-term basis to community groups. This is a win-win situation, for the government will lose little to no funds, the sites are more likely to remain in satisfactory condition with a reduced risk of vandalism, and community groups will have an increased capacity to provide essential community services. However, it should be recognised that sites the government does choose to lease out should be appropriate to the needs of the community groups obtaining a lease.
The ACTCOSS 2007-08 budget submission called on the ACT government to ensure that community organisations have equitable access to safe and appropriate premises. The submission stated:
Effective community services require quality and appropriate premises. In many cases, community organisations are forced to locate in residual premises—locations and buildings that are excess to the needs of government and not suitable for businesses. This situations means that opportunities to engage with consumers are not maximised, and on occasion, that organisational staff and volunteers are working in primitive or unsafe conditions.
I also draw attention to ACTCOSS’s concern that the government appears to be pushing community groups out of Civic. Take the QE2 and Westlund House, for example. Providing closed school sites and the Griffith library to community groups does not provide a long-term solution to all the accommodation problems that community groups are suffering. Accessibility of their premises to people without cars should be a core criterion for location.
ACTCOSS and the Greens support ACTPLA’s 2004 recommendation that “the provision of community facilities needs to be a diverse and adaptable supply of accessible facilities, which are affordable to meet government goals for building social capital in the Canberra community”. It is inappropriate to assume that community groups can be given the scraps and that they should be happy with whatever they can get. They deserve much greater respect than that.
Mr Speaker, these closed sites are potentially part of the solution to a complex problem, which includes community services, education and accommodation. I hope that the government is able to recognise these difficulties and has enough faith in the community not only to be open in its processes but to seek advice on these issues. Most particularly, its own processes require it to prepare an options report on all sites with a full cost-benefit analysis of the range of uses and with all costs and benefits explicitly included.
There is no rationale for this government to do that work and to fail to allow the ACT community to participate in its development and comment on it when it is finished. The government might have argued that the Costello report needed to be confidential
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .