Page 1442 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 6 June 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
One of the reasons for the current tender process is that the Albert Hall has been allowed to fall into a state of disrepair. The ACT government has been busy with all manner of superfluous projects, but it has not kept its buildings from falling apart and it now wants the private sector, effectively, to pick up the slack. I have not been in this place for a terribly long time, but I have vivid recollections of hearing Mr Quinlan, in estimates just two years ago, tell us about a tranche of funds that he said were going to be used for the convention centre, and then he told Mr Seselja and me when we questioned him that money was there already to upgrade the Albert Hall, first to do a feasibility study for $40,000. He said, “That will leave us $8.5 million out of the $40 million that is going to be spent on the convention centre and it will be able to be used to improve this place.” What ever happened to that money? It has disappeared into the ether and now they have come up with an ingenious way of saying, “Shift the cost onto somebody else.” I do not think the people of Canberra are all that thrilled that this hall will simply become a wedding reception centre at the expense of community interest.
Prior to the tender process currently under way with the Albert Hall, I understand the ACT government had discussions with the National Capital Authority. The NCA has been working towards resolving some of the issues that are currently the subject of dispute. My office has been told by staff at the NCA that, through their discussions with the ACT government, the NCA believe that the government intended to wait until these issues were resolved. That is what this motion says: wait. You do not get 400 to 600 people come to a community meeting if the community think that they have been adequately consulted. Clearly they have not.
Mr Hargreaves: Two hundred.
MR MULCAHY: Mr Hargreaves says there were 200. He was not there and I was not there. I have seen reports in the media and heard from my colleagues that there were somewhere between 400 and 600 people. I will take even the conservative figure of 400. When 400 people come out on a cold night in Canberra to say that they are unhappy with the decisions of a government, I suggest to the minister that he ought to start taking notes. We saw the fury of people in the Griffith area and neighbouring suburbs over the library, and my strong view is that the same fury is going to continue to be perpetuated in the area until we put the brakes on this tender process and go back and adequately consult and listen to what the people are saying to us.
The NCA believe that the government intended to wait until these issues were resolved and amendments finalised before it commenced the tender process. Of course, that has not been the case. Instead, the government has taken the surprising step of beginning a tender process for a building with an uncertain future in terms of its uses clause and its heritage status. The government has been rather vague on what the uses clause allows. The government told residents that the uses clause allows the hall to be used as a cultural facility and for ancillary retail and commercial activities, but it did not assure the community that the hall would be restricted to these uses.
The community is entitled to have some certainty over the future of the hall, and the issue again shows that the government has failed in its priorities. The government should not have allowed the Albert Hall to degenerate to the point where it is now
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .