Page 4311 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 27 November 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
playgrounds are placed in the ACT. Most playgrounds are placed in locations that are in quiet areas. The actual playground is often in a broader open space and they are designed to be placed further from the road. In the design phase, that is the way the playgrounds have generally been set up.
I note Mrs Jones cited a couple of examples of fenced playgrounds. One was in Holbrook. If I am thinking of the right location, it is right next to the Hume Highway. That would be a good reason to fence a playground. Where trucks are rolling through the town and there are large volumes of traffic, yes, I think that would be an appropriate example. The other example she gave was from Sydney. I do not know the site referred to but I suspect, again, there are similar high volume and perhaps even high speed traffic considerations. So the first issue is that in the ACT generally most of the playgrounds are in areas that are away from main roads.
This will be a more challenging conversation and I am going to frame my words very carefully here so that they are not twisted in some way. We need to think about what sort of space we want to create and where we want the onus of responsibility to lie. There are some issues around how risk is addressed and whether, in providing a play space, TAMS is also expected to provide a child minding service. It is important to think about balancing—and it goes to the comments I made in the earlier letter to Mrs Jones—that ability for freedom, that ability for children to play spontaneously, the ability for a child to perhaps get away if they are being bullied by another child and whether a fenced enclosure could present some problems in that regard. I think there are a range of subtle issues where people would hold different views about the suitability of fencing in a playground.
If there are specific locations where members feel there is a particular concern, they should raise that with TAMS, through Canberra Connect or with me. Mrs Jones has done that with respect to the Gungahlin place and received an answer on that occasion. Certainly, there is scope to examine individual locations where there may be particular exposure to a busy or perhaps a higher speed road, and quite appropriately so.
I have, as I indicated, prepared an amendment to Mrs Jones’s motion which outlines the work that the ACT government continues to do to manage and develop playgrounds in our ACT parks. There is a clear focus by the government, and especially by TAMS, on ensuring that playgrounds are kept at as high a standard as possible and are safe for public use at all times. That does remind me: Mrs Jones in her press release talked about dilapidated paint. Again—and it goes to the graffiti issue as well—where there are matters, people should simply call Canberra Connect. That is why it is there. As I have said in this place before, the government has a great advantage in that there are a couple of hundred thousand extra sets of eyes in the ACT that can help the government to identify these problems, rather than necessarily needing to have staff wandering around looking for maintenance issues.
Returning to my amendment, it is, I think, quite self-explanatory. I do not think it is particularly contradictory to the motion that Mrs Jones has moved. It simply builds on it. It acknowledges the work that is being done and notes that the government will continue to publish updates on the playground safety program and publish further
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video