29 May 2009

Parliamentary scrutiny not positive for Immigration Bridge

| johnboy
Join the conversation
22

Parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on National Capital and External Territories has released the report of its inquiry into the controversial immigration bridge proposal.

    The committee made three recommendations which if implemented will improve aspects of the process. First, the IBA [Immigration Bridge Australia] in improving its transparency and accountability should clarify its refund policy and make its financial documents available on its website.

    The committee also recommends that if the proposal proceeds and the bridge is ceded to the Commonwealth, the government should ensure that agreement to receive the bridge is met by increased government funding to the NCA to manage its ongoing maintenance.

    The final recommendation encourages the IBA to reconcile competing issues relating to Lake users and the vista and heritage values of the Lake and its foreshores. If the IBA finds that this challenge cannot be met or its development application for the proposed bridge is unsuccessful then the IBA should consider changing the location of the bridge or propose an alternative memorial to migration.

For a proposal by a private company calling for public subscriptions and lacking planning approval it’s certainly running a lot of TV advertising.

To my reading that final recommendation is bad news for the proposal as the sailing community is going to be very hard to please at the proposed location, a problem we flagged at the very start of the process.

Join the conversation

22
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Canberra is becoming a dumping ground for mausoleums. It’s time we share some — not the good ones — with other regional cities. So we should offer the immigration bridge to Rockhampton, Albany, Warrnambool and Launceston.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy10:08 am 30 May 09

I will add my support to the scrapping of this stupid, brain-damaged idea. It’s a waste of money, looks like shit, wrecks the view, spoils the lake for sailors and generally sucks in every possible way.

There’s an immigration wall at Darling harbour, I do believe…

Roger that. At $20 p/person you can have mum and dad and any Thumper siblings immortalised, Thumper.

kobez_outlaw11:58 pm 29 May 09

Yeah this thing is gross and money very poorly spent. They could at least spend the money on something that is going to see profit or attract tourists. Not this peice of hippy crap.

planeguy said :

I love the idea of *an* immigration memorial”.

Something like the Welcome Wall perhaps? http://www.anmm.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=404 and I am pretty sure on a trip to Fremantle I saw monument/memorial at the port there, commemorating immigrants who entered via our Western ports.

Just because Canberra is the capital, do we need a “National” monument to everything here? Or should they be situated in places more appropriate to what they are commemorating?

I love the idea of *an* immigration memorial, and something like a bridge may do that well.
However, this monstrosity of a design in the ludicrous proposed position is just silly.
LBG works so well, because it is open, has a convenient length “bridge to bridge” walk for tourists (and joggers at lunch time) and supports multiple uses. The proposed bridge achieves it’s honourable goal of a memorial by hindering other uses, and so should be rejected.

I’m an immigrant but last time I checked I didn’t need a bridge, thanks anyway.

Oh, but my family is having an street in Forde named after us, does that count?!

If an immigration bridge is such a good idea, then let’s build it across Sydney Harbour.

ant said :

What about an immigration under-lake tunnel? Or one of those perspex tubes they have now for watching fish?

There is some pretty gross stuff in the lake, some of it resembles polly waffles. Would provide a different perspective for sure.

I-filed said :

Wouldn’t an amazingly tall span bridge be OK, and not mess with the sailors?

Yeah. Then they could just paint it safety-orange so it blended in with the uber-subtle “Uluru line” that everyone loves so much!

aussielyn said :

Pedal Power are all for it.

I think that’s overstating their case a bit. Their support is conditional and they seem not to trust IBA’s word.

Waste of time, effort and money. Unwanted, unloved and unnecessary. And with our family heritage I’d even be entitled to stick the family name on the damn thing! Bury the whole idea.

Pedal Power are all for it. Pedestrians could jump in the lake to avoid the lycra clad cyclists who will claim it. Also who is going to keep the skateboarders off it?
It will make life interesting for the Water Police.

I think the immigration bridge is a great idea – it’s just too heavy a design. Wouldn’t an amazingly tall span bridge be OK, and not mess with the sailors?

ant said :

What about an immigration under-lake tunnel? Or one of those perspex tubes they have now for watching fish? The Immigration Fish and Mud Watching Memorial Tube. I’d donate for that.

Well that would certainly be appropriate for those who have migrated to Australia, via the back door. Perhaps we need two?

If they insist on building a bridge, it should actually go somewhere where pedestrians might want to actually go.

Parallel to Commonwealth Ave is a good one. Then they could turn one of the footpaths on that into bikes only.

James-T-Kirk2:22 pm 29 May 09

“I wonder if I’ll have my name on it?”

I guarantee that within 1 day of the bridge being opened, it will be tagged with lots of peoples names. 🙂

James-T-Kirk1:43 pm 29 May 09

Firstly, I have to declare my hand as a sailor –

Yep – it would be disastrous for the sailing community.

Yep – I am astounded that a private company could rail-road the government into allowing this thing, and then (if there is a failure), require the government to pay to continue supporting it. Using that logic, we should start laying tracks now for our light rail, then when we discover that it is not feasible, the government would then be required to run it????

Finally – Imaging the muggings – if you’re a girl, you have 400m of nowhere-to-run(tm)…. That can;t be good.

Finally-Finally – If some people who don’t even live here can cause such a controversial project to happen here, then why don’t we run a similar project in their own city?

🙂

Wouldn’t it be easier to build a new foot traffic only span parallel to Commonwealth Ave Bridge. Doesn’t stuff up the vista. Still fits in with the Par Triangle concept. Gets walkers off a busy cycling and running section. And then the tourists can look and gawk to their hearts content.

That or the tunnel is the go.

I could go either way on the concept, however the proposed location is unspeakably awful.

One of the submissions to the committee had what I thought was an excellent suggested location:
“across the entrance to the Nerang Pool in Commonwealth Park… (which) would provide a logical flow from an Immigration Celebration area across the Nerang Pool Bridge into Citizenship Place.”

The whole idea is stupid. Cluttering up the lake with a rinky-dink little bridge, stuffing it up for sailboats, wasting money (think taxpayers’ money won’t be spent? Ha!)… And the idea that some private mob is trying to railroad the authorities into letting it happen is frankly very annoying.

What about an immigration under-lake tunnel? Or one of those perspex tubes they have now for watching fish? The Immigration Fish and Mud Watching Memorial Tube. I’d donate for that.

[doublepost] mind you, the IBA only needs to point to the National Museum and say ‘what vista’? [/doublepost]

It’s one bridge i’d like to see burnt. Good luck in reconciling issues relating to the vista.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.