Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to make a contribution to this debate on the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Amendment Bill 2021. I also want to acknowledge people who have participated in improving this legislation. I met with the chair of the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust, Joseph Carrozzi, on a number of occasions and also with local community groups, including the Headland Preservation Group president, Jill L'Estrange.

This is important legislation because Sydney Harbour is an asset that is a jewel for the entire country. When you travel overseas and you look at what has happened around foreshores, be they ocean foreshores or harbour foreshores, it is hard to think of a comparison whereby the Australian egalitarian spirit is reflected by the fact that so many Australians have access to the land around Sydney Harbour. Whilst it's true that very few people can afford to live with harbour views, the truth is everyone can enjoy harbour views and can enjoy the amenity around Sydney Harbour because of that access, which is why it's so important that this national parliament continue to do what previous generations have done, which is to protect harbour foreshores. There are attempts from time to time to undermine that to essentially have Sydney Harbour and its beautiful assets, including the islands in the harbour—including Cockatoo Island, which is, of course, part of the Grayndler electorate—for sale. That would, I think, be a very retrograde step, because, if we get it wrong once, it disappears forever, which is why it is so important.

My mate Russell Crowe said this about Sydney: 'The best things about Sydney are free: the sunshine is free, the harbour is free and the beach is free.' This is why you see such a reaction when you have proposals like the proposal to essentially privatise a bit of Bondi Beach. As an Australian doing the backpacker thing that young Australians do, I was quite shocked when I arrived in Europe and people wanted money to use the beach. Here in Australia that's not our way, and it's one that thank goodness we have and we need to hold onto.

But here, of course, we could have privatisation. We went close with some of the proposals for changes to this bill that were advocated for at one stage. The proposal, for example, on Cockatoo Island to essentially privatise it—that's what it was; let's call it for what it was—into corporate hands, dressed up as a way of remediating the harbour but essentially using that island for a for-profit motel and other facilities, was just entirely inappropriate. It's important that they got rejected. It's important that the draft legislation has been changed to remove the proposal for 49-year leases and the free-for-all which would have been allowed under some of the proposals that were put forward. I pay tribute to the assistant shadow minister, the member for Fremantle, who advocated very strongly on these issues, because at risk wasn't just Cockatoo Island but North Head, the Headland Park at Mosman's Middle Head and the Platypus former submarine base at Neutral Bay as well. All of these assets are really critical assets.

When we were last in government, something that would be anathema to those opposite who'd just look at the electoral map is one of the things we funded through the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program, which was a major upgrade of the old industrial facilities at North Sydney that overlook the harbour. It was turned into an arts space and a space for the community, done along with North Sydney Council. It was a really good proposal. We funded the upgrade of the foreshore at Manly Beach. For neither of those did we look at the electoral map. Both of those have improved an asset that anyone can go to, because they're free, and enjoy the amenity which is in the great city of Sydney with its great natural asset of Sydney Harbour. That is really important. My mentor who would have turned 100 just a few days ago, on 28 May, Tom Uren, was a patron of the Defenders of Sydney Harbour Foreshores. As he put it, 'It really belongs to the people not only of Mosman or of Sydney but the nation as a whole.' That is exactly right.

With this bill, the right decision has been made in the public interest and for the public good. The bill establishes the harbour trust as an ongoing entity. The harbour trust will be able to fulfil its obligation to rehabilitate, preserve and maintain trust sites for future generations of Australians. There's a cap on the leases at 35 years, with leases of longer than 25 years subject to a disallowance by the parliament. What that will do is provide for ongoing protection of public ownership and access. It will help ensure visitor access to more facilities, as they visit the harbour trust's historic sites, and establish operating frameworks that support the future viability of the harbour trust. There will be a need for more investment in some areas, and that includes Cockatoo Island. Cockatoo Island is a gem in the crown. Not many people, probably even those in Sydney, have been to Cockatoo Island, and that's really unfortunate. It should be a place that people can visit. I'm not of the view that you lock places up forever. I'm of the view that public places, particularly in a city like Sydney, are there to be used, to be enjoyed for community activity.

Cockatoo Island's history is in its industrial history in terms of shipbuilding, in the role that it has played in defence, and, might I say, in the role that these sites, these harbour islands, have played in history going back not a couple of hundred years but 65,000 years. There are Indigenous art sites on most of the harbour islands. Indeed, if you look at the islands' history even in recent times, with the role that islands played for First Nations women, and some being for ceremonial use, there is a great deal there that we need to acknowledge and we need to celebrate. We do need to remediate some of the land there and open it up for people, wherever they live and not just for those who live in Sydney, because this is an international asset.

At the risk of upsetting my friends and our US allies, an important alliance, I ask with due respect: San Francisco harbour? Seriously, you go there and, compared with Sydney, you think, 'Really? What's the big deal?' Sydney Harbour has those islands, which should be economic assets as well as preserved environmentally. Many years ago I attended All Tomorrow's Parties curated by Nick Cave on Cockatoo Island. People from all over attended, and that asset was used. It was a fantastic thing. We don't use those assets enough, and when you look at the assets that are available, some of which are in my electorate, whether it be Cockatoo Island or Callum Park, they should be used. Some argue and the Greens political party will regularly argue that they should just be there and no-one's allowed to use them, no-one's allowed to walk on them, no-one's allowed to access them. That's not my view. My view is that great public spaces should be looked after in a sustainable way but they should also be used in a way that promotes public use.

I want to turn to Tom Uren's words to the Senate environmental legislative committee more than two decades ago, when the trust was being established. His words, as a historian of the harbour, are important. He said this:

A public servant when issuing a land grant around Cremorne Point in 1833, stipulated that 100 feet above the high tide water mark should be retained for public access. Balls Head and Berry's Island were publicly acquired by the Lang Government in 1926. The open space on the Harbour shores around Castlecrag was created by the intelligent and visionary planning of Walter Burley Griffin.

So this hasn't just happened. People have fought for these issues. Indeed, Tom Uren fought alongside Tony Abbott to protect some of our foreshore land—a great example of working across the political divide for a common interest for our nation.

We can do much better. There have been visionaries who have done extraordinary things. One comparison, that will perhaps make up for my comments about San Francisco, is with our friends in the United States who created Central Park in New York, in 1853—what a vision for Manhattan, setting aside that public space for generations of New Yorkers and visitors to benefit from, as they have been able to ever since. That's one of the things that makes New York City such a great city. So it is important that we do the right thing by the harbour. This bill does do the right thing. It is true to the vision that that long-ago public servant had, way back in 1833. Imagine thinking that through—for that land above the high-water mark to be protected. It has made an incredible difference. It is something about Sydney.

Like my colleague the member for Sydney, I know, when I cross Sydney Harbour Bridge with visitors, I point to the Sirius building—purpose-built public housing, particularly built for people with disabilities. The state government flogged it off. There won't be any poor people living there now. That was one of the great things about Australia. When we look at the nature of our cities, we have to make sure that things that should be available to everyone are available to everyone. That's why that sell-off was bad and that's why there should not be any encroachment on our harbour or on the other great assets that we have, like the Parramatta River, the Georges River, the Nepean River. They should be protected and preserved for this and for future generations. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context