Page 2158 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 28 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
community organisations to access that space. Of course, as everybody knows, that has become very difficult for community organisations because of the costs involved. While I sponsor a number of meetings per year from my DOA, having been told that I have been given an allowance that makes that possible, it is a room that should be used more often than it is. There is demand out there in the community and I still oppose the changes that took place to public access to those buildings. It is a community service that we could return to the community, as it funds us to be here.
Year after year notes in the budget reflect a greater than anticipated use of the building. It is time that such a use was not only expected, but as I said, encouraged, celebrated and resourced. Many public events are held in this building. They include issues-based meetings which reflect community engagement with matters of public policy. I would have thought that the government would want to encourage such engagement because it is an important element of community development and it is a sign that we have a resilient democracy which encourages the investigation of issues and debate about them. Of course, the ACT lacks a town hall. Some people have said that the Albert Hall is the nearest thing we have to that and, for that reason, should be preserved. But a town hall really needs to be more directly under the administration of the Assembly. I think the reception room is a de facto town hall. Of course it would be lovely if we had a much greater capacity to hold larger meetings, but meanwhile we have the reception room.
In the ACT, of course, because the levels of government are merged, the house of parliament and the town hall should be merged as well. I suggest that it is time for the Assembly to review its role and adopt a broader view of the links between democracy and community. The provision of a public meeting room, at little or no cost, in an accessible and highly visible location, is intrinsic to its operations. Civic Square is still waiting to be brought alive. The inclusion of the library has increased some traffic there, but if we had a lively and active community hall and reception room it would also add to Civic. It should seen as part of the whole operation of Civic Square.
Furthermore, I have a few brief comments about the provision of parliamentary services as well. First, I believe we are well supported by a team which is non-partisan, which is professional, which is generous and enthusiastic. It looks to provide us, the members and staff, with whatever assistance and support we might require. I have nothing but praise for the work of everyone in this place that keeps it running. There are some limits to the services and it would be good to review. For instance, I would have thought it would be possible for corporate services, or some other part of the administration, to negotiate with the library to see what it needs so that it can provide more comprehensive and immediate media monitoring.
There is a very limited amount to what the library can do for us now, though it does have a research provision that people are very happy to engage when they have the time. But, at the moment, if you ask the library to tape Four Corners, for instance, because there is a program on that that is of interest, as indeed there was last night, it is not able to do that. So everyone has to run around and find somebody who is able to do that. I believe that is quite a lack. It is set up to tape certain programs, but it is not set up for the request that comes slightly from out of field, not that you could say Four Corners was that. There are things that other MLAs and I might like. I am
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .