David Feeney (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That, in accordance with section 5 of the Parliament Act 1974, the Senate approves the proposal by the National Capital Authority for capital works within the Parliamentary Zone relating to the installation of artwork known as ‘The Prime Ministers’.

Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Materiel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Acting Deputy President Trood, I seek leave to make a short statement.

Russell Trood (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Materiel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a motion to approve the erection of two statues in the Parliamentary Zone, one to former Prime Minister John Curtin and the other to former Prime Minister Ben Chifley. The opposition does not oppose this motion and believes it is appropriate to honour Australian Prime Ministers in the national capital. Works of this kind are appropriate in that sense. I do not particularly wish to question the judgement of the ACT government as a senator in funding this work—it is not a federal government funded work but an ACT government funded work—although as a taxpayer in the ACT I do have some misgivings about the priorities of the ACT government when we have the longest waiting times in the country in our hospitals and we cannot provide affordable housing to our citizens, but that is a debate for another place and another time. My concern with this motion and this process is that it seems to sideline the role of the federal government and the federal parliament in determining systematically how Australia’s prime ministers will be commemorated within the Parliament Zone. This is a process that sees which prime ministers will be commemorated and how and when determined not by the federal government or by the National Capital Authority, for example, but by who comes through the government’s door with a proposal to erect a statue or other commemoration.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why do only Labor prime ministers get statues?

Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Materiel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Indeed, Senator Brandis, this will be the third statue that the ACT Labor government has erected to federal Labor government ministers. The first of course notoriously was the statue of Al Grassby. This process needs to be revised. It is not a good process and I think we should reconsider the way in which this is occurring.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Acting Deputy President, I too seek leave to make a short statement.

The Acting Deputy President:

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I agree with Senator Humphries. I think there does need to be a review of where this process is going and what it ultimately means. Ought we not have a statue to all prime ministers and maybe several ministers as well? We need to have a strategy about this that is clearly understood, otherwise we have governments of the day selecting who they think is worthy of a statue in the national capital. It may well be that that is based on a political determination. In brief, it ought to be at arms length. Maybe there needs to be some independent authority looking at it. Otherwise it might be like Mount Rushmore—there is no end to it and nobody quite knows how to stop the process that is underway. So I agree with Senator Humphries that it does need some long-term strategy and some independence put into the process. I am not going to oppose the motion but I agree with Senator Humphries on this.

Question agreed to.