Page 2467 - Week 08 - Thursday, 30 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Through the funding for the Harrison district playing fields and our partnership with ACT Cricket, we are going to see an expanded pavilion, public toilets, a canteen, storage, cricket practice nets, 200 car parks, fencing and landscaping as part of this major sport and recreation precinct for the people of Harrison. Through the partnership with Harrison primary school and the associated neighbourhood oval that is part of this overall facility, it is important that we are using drought-resistant grass and tank and pump systems, and that as much of the surrounding playgrounds and areas of Harrison primary school as possible are able to be watered using grey water from the school. That is an important initiative.
I turn to swimming pools. Mr Smyth asked why we would have a feasibility study into future aquatic facilities in the city and then also make provision for replacement of the dome. The answer to that question lies in a meeting that Mr Smyth and I had some time ago when I was a few months into the tourism portfolio, when he presented a particular proposal in relation to expanding convention facilities for the territory. The proposal that he put forward was a relocation of the pool—to move it from its existing site to another site to accommodate an expanded convention centre and hotel facilities.
As part of an overall planning study and an assessment of where the appropriate places are for a convention centre and a swimming pool in the city, this is part of the broader consideration. The National Capital Authority, through the Griffin legacy amendments, and the federal government direction appear to indicate that any commonwealth support for a new convention centre for the ACT would need to have it located in West Basin. That does appear to be the commonwealth’s position.
Mr Smyth: No, they have got another report. They have got a new report.
MR BARR: They have, yes. I understand that there is further debate to be had on that. But the important work that we need to undertake is to assess the full needs for a city aquatic centre. There has been a call for a facility of the standard of what is available in CISAC at Belconnen. Obviously, that will cost more than $2 million. However, I believe that we have a pressing need to look at the dome that is currently over the existing swimming facility. The question concerns having that provision there to replace the dome but also looking at what the longer-term needs may be.
Even with the best case for a new convention centre we are looking at about 2013 before it would be able to be opened. The question we will have to answer—this is part of what is going to be addressed through the studies—concerns what you would do in terms of swimming facilities in the lead-up to a new convention centre. If the convention centre is going to be in West Basin, we would need to redevelop or reinvigorate the facility that is available in the city at the moment on its current site. And there are heritage issues at play here.
We need to consider all of those things. We also need to look at the design of a future dome. We would not want to replace what I think most people would agree is the particularly unappealing dome that Mr Duby supported when he was minister many years ago. It might be able to be taken down or opened up a bit more in the summer months: people quite rightly argue that through the summer months it is not a particularly pleasant experience in the pool.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .