Page 3746 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 24 August 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
about the $2 million sky bridge to allow ministers to get to divisions in that little bit more comfort.
Yet whether you take the 2007 building or the present initiative, the Canberra Liberals’ position has been consistent. Co-location of a large number of the ACT public service means relocating staff to the town centres becomes unlikely. In other words, governments are not able to serve residents as well as if they are located near where people live. Most Canberrans know this. CP Glover from Civic had this to say:
There used to be a policy of distributing government accommodation to the satellite centres. Why change to centralising at Civic?
Ed Dobson from Hughes:
One of the reasons given for building the proposed Civic Government Office Block is that the majority of ACT public servants are accommodated in substandard offices … Is the proposed $432 million building an attempt to correct the Government’s mismanagement of the office program?
Good question. B Legge-Wilkinson from Campbell:
The taxpayers of the ACT appear to have a Labor-Green project which will chain them to massive public debt—assuredly a millstone around the necks of present and future Canberrans. Meanwhile, more neglected civic responsibilities—potholes in roads, long delays in road reconstructions—will continue.
Hear, hear! Well said. Finally, RS Gilbert of Braddon, who wrote:
I wonder whether, if the costs to others of leaving empty the private building space presently occupied by public servants were also taken into account, there would be a net benefit or a net cost.
The point made by Mr Gilbert is valid. The ACT already has the highest office vacancy rate in Australia. As of July 2011 this vacancy rate was 13.3 per cent, up from 8.7 per cent in January 2010. Furthermore, in Civic, where the government office block is located, the vacancy rate as of July 2011 is at 14.2 per cent. The implications of adding another 50,000 to 60,000 square metres is obvious. The writing on the wall cannot be any clearer.
In fact, Ms Le Couteur, in her capacity as chair of the public accounts committee, was reported as saying that the government had not looked at the reality of the property market. On that, Ms Le Couteur, you are 100 per cent correct. In fact, she was even reported to have said there were so many empty offices on the market that the owners would upgrade them to the highest government standards. The point I would like to make here is this building will worsen the office space glut in the ACT. In short, it is bad for ACT businesses.
We have got a situation where there is a poor use of capital—$432 million on an office block that is not needed and which could be used for far more important community priorities. Secondly, it is also coming at a time when we already have an
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video