Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2015 Week 09 Hansard (Wednesday, 12 August 2015) . . Page.. 2775 ..

funded through an ongoing upgraded program. In 2015-16 a feasibility study is being undertaken and preliminary plans prepared for improving the public domain around the local shops at Kambah—the Marconi Crescent ones, which have also been referred to in today’s debate. In 2014-15 and 2015-16 a total of $4,308,000 of capital works funding has been made available for upgrades at local centres. These upgrade works focus on priority areas and elements identified through the forward design process which I spoke about earlier—that is, the consultation undertaken with leaseholders, local community groups and traders.

I will also talk about the issue I touched on earlier—that is, that much of the land and space is owned, controlled or leased by private parties. This is a really important issue. I have asked Territory and Municipal Services to review the funding model for future upgrades at shopping centres, and this work is currently underway. I am looking at what other jurisdictions do. I am happy to acknowledge that some members of the community have expressed frustration to me when TAMS has completed the work it has undertaken at a local shopping centre on the public domain and yet the shops look the same. Of course, TAMS does not have any control or ability to work on those areas.

There a number of examples around where shop owners have done nothing at the time that TAMS has done upgrade work. Members of the community turn up and go, “Yes, there’s been all this construction work, and yes, the footpath looks great and I appreciate the new trees and the new lights and things like that, but what about the shops?”

Mr Hanson: Too busy with light rail, Shane?

MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Dr Bourke): Order, Mr Hanson!

MR RATTENBURY: Mr Hanson is interjecting, as he always does. I think he is suggesting the government should spend money upgrading private property as well. That seems to be what he is suggesting. I do not think that is an appropriate role for government. I would like, though, to explore a co-investment model so that when the government approaches a shopping centre and says, “The government is prepared to commit money to this shopping centre,” the traders, the owners of those buildings, also participate so that we get an enhanced centre upgrade where both the public and the private domains are upgraded. We have seen some precursors to that. It is done in other jurisdictions, and I think of the recent example of Chapman shops, where some of the store owners were very enthusiastic participants in the upgrade program and did some work on their locations as well. That is a welcome contribution and one I am keen to explore further.

We have seen some great examples of these partnership and co-investment models, be it the lawns at Green Square at Kingston or the ongoing partnership with Canberra CBD, where traders contribute towards a range of upgrades and initiatives in the CBD. I have asked TAMS to get on with that. I am keen to explore those models and how it can work, how it has worked in other jurisdictions and where others have made not such good attempts at their programs.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video