Please wait. Contacting image service... loading

Article text

Too little
public
debate' on
Canberra
planning
The plan for Canberra
has been developed on a
series of assumptions
which have been inade
quately debated at public
level, according to the
Australian Planning In
stitute Journal.
Canberra is one of the
most significant planning
laboratories in the world
and planning is of a high
standard, it says.
But the public is rarely
permitted to enter the do
main of policy decisions.
Instead it is treated to a
"series of glossy public
relations documents and
annual reports which care
fully omitted the most im
portant aspccts".
These comments are
contained in an editorial
in the journal's current
issue. Under the heading,
'A Free Vote', the editorial
strongly criticiscs aspccts
of the controversy over the
siting of a permanent Par
liament House, particularly
the role of the Govern
ment.
No public
discussion
The location of the Par
liament was decided origin
ally in the Menzics era, the
journal says.
It was, in effect, a de
cision of the Executive; no
public discussion was
allowed. The Parliament
ary Triangle was developed
with the understanding that
Parliament House would
be on the lakeside.
Dissent was rare, but
somehow the forces of
democracy won and the
Prime Minister, Mr Gor
ton, allowed a free-vote
debate on the issue.
There remained a strong
suspicion that the right de
cision was made for the
wrong reasons, but the
lakeside site was rejected
by both the Senate and
the House of Representa
tives.
The editorial says that
if the rejection of the lake
side site was absolute, the
existing Parliament House
would have to be de
molished.
The Camp Hill site was
probably too small while
Capital Hill was "big
enough and has a strong
symbolic content".
A Joint Select Commit
tee of Parliament is ex
pected to begin this week
a consideration of which
site should be set aside for
the future Parliament.
$