Page 1432 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 6 June 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
future tender for the lease of the precinct, not the sale of it. A minor technical amendment is being circulated now.
I stand today to demand that the government abort the current tender process for the management of the Albert Hall and extend current management arrangements for at least six months. I also stand to heavily criticise this government for its neglect of this fine old building, and I stand to demand that the government ensure adequate community use of the hall in the future.
The Albert Hall is a much-loved icon and has been part of the Canberra landscape since 1928. Until the 1960s, when the Canberra Theatre was completed and cinemas were constructed, the Albert Hall was Canberra’s main entertainment venue. It was used for concerts, meetings, dances and public displays. Many community groups have had a very long association with the hall. The Horticultural Society of Canberra first started using the Albert Hall for their floral displays in 1929 and only stopped as recently as 2002. The wonderful antiques and collectibles fair has been associated with the hall for many years and, Rotary first used the hall 78 years ago.
The Albert Hall once accommodated up to 450 functions per year and it could easily do so again. Recent years have seen less community use, mostly due to the failure of this government to adequately maintain the facility to a minimum standard. In some cases it has been because the costs for many community groups to use this hall have begun to outstretch their budgets. They are being asked to pay somewhat too high a price to cover what really has been years of neglect by this government.
It is very important that the Albert Hall remain in public ownership. We do not quibble or have any concern at all with the tendering process, which involves private contracting, but we do say that it is essential that this hall ultimately remain in public ownership. It is critical to keep the management of this hall as a public asset. It is a valuable public asset. It should not ever be lost to the public as an icon, as an asset, that can be used by the public.
We certainly have no problem with the Albert Hall being used also for commercial purposes. If part of a tendering process in the future involves commercial use to allow a tenderer to recoup the costs of maintenance, if maintenance is a responsibility as part of that contract, we would have no problem with that either, but it is very important that the government set in place conditions that allow for a very fair balance between community use and any form of commercial use. As I was saying, the hiring cost for community groups must never be put out of reach. Affordable community access to the Albert Hall is a must.
Mr Speaker, let me turn now to the appalling state of the Albert Hall currently. It is in a state of neglect. This lovely old building has been allowed to run to rack and ruin. The figure for priority work identified in the tender document is $1.02 million. The works program of the current tender specifies that this work needs to be completed within a three-year time frame. The tendering process suggests that there will be another compliance report in four years, which would entail unknown costs. As management procedures go, that should be the bottom line, but we are concerned that the hall in its current state be refurbished as quickly as possible before its tendered use goes much further.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .