Page 4219 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 26 November 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The next goal: establishing enduring international recognition of Canberra and its role as the capital. Again, I am not sure how you will measure that. It will be interesting to see what baseline the government established to say what the recognition level of the ACT and Canberra as Australia’s national capital was before the start of the centenary and how much they will be able to attribute any increase in recognition to the centenary.
The fourth goal: build a positive image and reputation of Canberra as a city and a community. Again, that will require an external measurement. It would be great if the Chief Minister tabled perhaps by the end of the sitting week the baseline understanding for each of these criteria. It will be interesting to see how we measure that difference and how much we attribute to the centenary.
The fifth goal: build lasting legacies of community value through memorable celebrations and high quality projects. I suspect there will be lasting legacies of community value. People certainly got out and about and had a good time. I hope that continues in those communities, whether it be in art or sport or whatever that segment of the community is or whether it is a locational community—the suburb or the area. Some have done more than others, but it will be interesting to see what is the base, how do you measure it and what was the bang for the buck. How much value did we get for what I now understand to be $32 million?
The last goal is perhaps the one that is the most interesting: create impetus for future development of the national capital. Again, you would have to ask what are the legacies of the centenary, whether it be an image—which is covered in some of the other areas—in recognition and also in the built form. We all understand how the arboretum has become the centenary gift, but it was not that when it started. The government was probably quite lucky that the arboretum had started when the centenary came along. It was not planned. The forest had burnt, and Mr Stanhope apparently went to the federal government without much community consultation and said, “Well, I want more money for my pet idea.” The community might have had different views had they been asked on what was the lasting built legacy they might have achieved from the centenary.
But if you look at it in terms of economic development and industry development, do we have a better view of where the city is going as a consequence of the centenary? I suspect not. Will there be a legacy from that to create impetus for the future development of the nation’s capital? I suspect not. The government has been busy; they have got a few more plans. We have got city to the lake now and the draft city plan. But it is interesting, because Mr Corbell had a City Hill plan in 2005 that had something like 16 individual projects in it. How many have occurred? Well, the answer to that would be none. Eight years later nothing has happened. It is well and good to have the plans, but what is better is if you actually have an outcome, a drive and an ability to pay for it. Mr Barr wants a stadium but will not tell us how he will pay for it. Mr Corbell and Mr Rattenbury are clearly interested in the train set but cannot tell us how they will pay for it and, indeed, do not care. As the Treasurer articulated so clearly, there is no number too high that will stop capital metro, and that is of great concern.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video