Page 2436 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 13 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I think that the key point is really that the majority of ACT public servants are working in substandard accommodation, in B, C and D grade buildings, which is unfair to the workforce. Also, these office buildings, being substandard, are not very energy efficient and are therefore costly to run as well as a burden on the ACT government’s aim of achieving carbon neutrality by 2020.
In terms of the high office vacancy rate in the city, I agree that this is obviously far from ideal. However, when this is broken down into building grades, I think you will find that there is very little A-grade office space available. The commonwealth government have a minimum requirement for 4.5 star NABERS buildings, as they want to ensure that their staff are in good quality office spaces and that they are running efficient buildings in terms of energy use. So, although the office vacancy rate is high, it is not the type of office space that good employers want.
The ACT government are no different. They do not want staff to be working in substandard conditions. Madam Deputy Speaker, it is time for many office buildings in Canberra to be brought out of the 60s and into the 21st century. This could be done either by adaptive re-use, something the Greens are keen on, or by knock-down rebuilds. This is something that needs serious evaluation on a case by case basis, but overall, just as it is with cars, washing machines and fridges, it is actually usually the daily use of energy that makes the biggest difference in terms of overall lifecycle analysis of energy use, over that of the embodied energy of the existing concrete. Certainly that is enhanced when the building materials are recycled if there is a demolition.
I believe that we could achieve something like a 79 per cent reduction in energy use by shifting our ACT public service into more energy efficient buildings—clearly, a priority if we are to achieve carbon neutrality and do our bit for achieving the ACT’s overall emissions reduction targets. And there is a range of other issues that arise in terms of the efficiencies arising from co-location, and I think that that is possible given the way the registration of interest has been put forward. Some sort of campus model, I think, is particularly beneficial and certainly we will be discussing later today, under Ms Lawder’s motion, the issue of having a single conservation agency. I am sure we will come to that in good time.
But having these sorts of campus style accommodation means that those agencies can be located together much more effectively. I think there is also, certainly, social issues around upgrading ACT government office buildings, with the opportunity to modernise with things like the inclusion of childcare centres, improved IT, security and intranet services—all of those sorts of things that go with modernising the government’s office accommodation are important components of the discussion about the future of the government office accommodation strategy.
Much seemed to be made in today’s paper about the particular requirement that buildings be within a 10-minute walk of the Assembly. I have tried to think about that. I think for most parts of Civic, if you walked more than 10 minutes from the Assembly you would be essentially out of the city, so that requirement is one that really encompasses most spaces, either existing available blocks or existing buildings in terms of taking up vacant office accommodation space or buildings that might be retrofitted for the purpose.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video