2010 Don Aitkin Lecture - University of Canberra
I wish to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land we are meeting on, the Ngunnawal people. I acknowledge and respect their continuing culture and the contribution they make to the life of this city and this region.
I would also like to acknowledge and welcome other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who may be attending this event.
Thank you Professor Parker for your words of introduction to this, the 2010 Don Aitkin Lecture.
Vice-Chancellor of the University of Canberra for more than ten years, Don Aitkin was responsible for the transformation of the University from a college of advanced education to an international and forward thinking institution.
Don is also a Fellow of the Australian Planning Institute and holds strong views on urban development.
These lectures, in his name, are but young - beginning in 2005. But the list of previous speakers is impressive – Don himself, John Frow, Geoffrey Gallop, John Dawkins, Tom Calma.
These lectures, in his name, are but young - beginning in 2005. But the list of previous speakers is impressive – Don himself, John Frow, Geoffrey Gallop, John Dawkins, Tom Calma.
So, a strong focus on reformers with a passion for education, and two former politicians … formerpoliticians. Is the University trying to tell me something Stephen?
Tonight I want to give a Generation X perspective on some of the issues that we face, particularly in relation to the development of our city.
And I want to talk about them in the context of change – the change we have been through, the change we are going though, and if we get it right, the change we can lead, to make this a better place in which to live.
First, a little about me.
I am a proud Canberran. I was born in Lismore and moved to Canberra in 1977.
I have lived north AND south of the Lake, in inner and outer suburban areas. In houses, townhouses and apartments. I have rented on my own, in student share houses and group-houses. I am now a first home owner.
I guess you could say I have enjoyed the full “life-cycle” and “life-style” experiences open to someone “growing up” in Canberra in the 70s, 80s, 90s and today.
I owe this city my education. Over the years, I attended Holt preschool, the AME School, Turner Primary, Lyneham High and Lake Ginninderra College before majoring in economics, economic history and political science at the Australian National University in the mid-1990s.
Although only a Gen Xer, I have lived in Canberra for more than a third of its 97 years.
And in that time I have seen the city change dramatically for the better. That change is what I want to focus on tonight.
Some have said Canberra is a city without a history. Not surprising perhaps. We are less than a century old, and we were forged on a draughtsman’s table, not in blood and conflict.
But we do have a history, and it’s vital that we recognise it and preserve that which is significant to our narrative.
This Government has done an enormous amount in this regard.
The Canberra Gold Awards recognise those who were here 50 years or more ago – and what they have built.
More than 2,000 Canberrans have received the award, which is handed out in March each year.
Our Indigenous heritage is now recognised, preserved and honoured.
The government has, for example, committed funding to research and compile formal genealogies of each of the acknowledged families of traditional owners in the ACT.
The Tharwa Bridge, the Canberra Glassworks, the Albert Hall – are all important heritage projects.
The Glassworks is a great example of conservation with renewal, resulting in the rebirth of the first public building in Canberra, the original powerhouse in Kingston.
In the three years since the Glassworks reopened in Kingston, tens of thousands of visitors have passed through and the facility, which has attracted national and international acclaim.
In the last budget the Government committed funding to upgrade the historic Strathnairn Arts Centre and heritage properties including Ginninderra Blacksmith’s Workshop, the Valley Ruin Homestead, Robertson House, Tralee and Couranga Homesteads and Cargill’s Cottage.
And the Canberra Centenary will of course strongly connect us to the ‘birth’ of the city in 1913.
But just as a good archivist is one who knows what to throw out, we have to know that we can’t keep everything.
Just because it’s old, doesn’t mean it’s worth keeping.
As world renowned city and cultural planner Charles Landry said on his recent visit to Canberra, we have to learn to “keep the best, reject the rest”.
It’s when we encounter calls to keep it all that things get difficult.
When it comes to planning our city, there are many reasons for opposing change, and some of them are valid.
But the more spurious arguments tend to come from those who want to preserve Canberra as a museum to their own childhood.
They will for example fondly remember a library that they frequented when they were at school, and passionately fight for its preservation, even though they never use it and never will.
They will fight for the preservation of a tree, not because of its inherent value, but simply because they climbed it when they were young.
So let’s take some time to ask the question – do we really want nothing to change?
Do we really want to preserve Canberra as a museum to our childhood?
And even if we do, then which Canberra?
The Canberra of prohibition?
The Canberra of white, middle class, male, conservative monoculture?
The Canberra where every shop shut its doors at midday on Saturday?
The Canberra where women could only be associate members of clubs and were barred from the snooker room (unless they were serving drinks of course)?
The Canberra of two television stations, both black & white?
Sure, it wasn’t all bad – far from it.
How often have you heard the expression “Canberra, it’s a great place to bring up children”?
So it was; so it still is.
But there has to be more to a city than that.
And like it or not, this city is changing.
Even if we wanted to stop it, we can’t.
There might be no tide in Lake Burley Griffin, but we can’t do a King Canute.
We can try to resist it, or we can embrace change to make Canberra what we want it to be.
Seventy years ago writer Warren Denning, in an entertaining and insightful little book on 1930s Canberra railed against what he called “the detestable class-awareness of the Capital”.
He described a city firmly entrenched in the “fundamental constructional error of parcelling the Public Servants into self-contained suburbs oriented on a kind of economic exclusiveness [which] put a premium on social standing”.
In those days, a person who had the temerity to live in a suburb that did not match his public service salary would find himself a social outcast.
I hope if Mr Denning were to rejoin us, he wouldn’t find too much to remind him of those days – with people steadfastly rejecting any change to their suburb that would bring in a different class of people.
We must work hard to avoid the perception that we are turning our inner suburbs into gated communities, keeping young and low income people out with a fence of unaffordability.
Do we want a society that tells thousands of young Canberrans looking for affordable accommodation in the inner suburbs “Too bad. This is our suburb, you can’t come in.”
I don’t.
But I also recognise that the challenge of public policy is to provide workable solutions to address genuine concerns.
If a street is becoming more densely populated through urban renewal then there should be just that – genuine urban renewal.
It should be more than just higher density. There should also be infrastructure renewal such as new footpaths, street lighting, and enhanced public transport and community services.
These are the benefits of change and renewal.
So I’m not arguing that people living in our inner suburbs, who have lived there for years, who want to ‘age in place’, should all move on.
I’m certainly not arguing that change should occur all at once.
Far from it.
But what I am arguing is that no one has a right to say:
We will decide who lives in our suburb, and the circumstances in which they live here.
I’d like to illustrate my point with some data on one of our inner suburbs – Dickson.
I talk about Dickson, but it could just as easily be Reid, Watson, Turner, or any other inner city suburb in Canberra.
Fifty years ago, Dickson was a sheep paddock (and probably the habitat of any number of endangered species).
Within ten years (1971 to be precise) it was home to 3,200 people. 44% of these were aged 19 and under. 30% were their parents – aged from 25 to 44 – and just 3% were over 60.
That was Dickson in 1971 - populous, and noisy with children.
Today it is very different. It has a thousand fewer people.
Its children – under 19s – make up just 16% of the population, down from 44%. Over 60s now comprise 18%, up from 3%.
But what is most interesting is what has happened to people of parenting age.
Despite the significant reduction in the proportion of children, the percentage of 25 to 44 year olds has increased from 30 to 36 per cent!
So we have a significantly different Dickson.
Dramatically fewer people, not many children, many more retired people, but a suburb dominated by Gen Xers – largely GenXers without children.
I suspect this means that families with children have been kept out of the new Dickson by the cost of buying a property there.
It also means that the Gen Xers living there have until now been relatively silent about the sort of suburb they want to see – hence my recent statements on the matter.
What I have been seeking to highlight in those statements is the fact that Gen Xers don’t seem to have the voice that reflects their numbers.
Is their relative silence a reflection of the fact that they have nothing to say?
I doubt it.
It’s just that Gen X, and Gen Y, communicate in a different way.
They have moved beyond traditional media and 20th century community meetings – you don’t see them writing “letters to the editor” or attending that many public ‘town hall’ style meetings.
They are much more likely to post a blog, participate in an online forum or use the booming social media networks like facebook, twitter or linked-in to express their views.
According to a recent survey by the Australian Psychological Society, Facebook and other online social networking sites are now "ingrained" and for many people their friendships depend on them.
A majority of respondents to the survey said the sites gave them more regular contact with friends and family, while 79 per cent said it fostered closer ties with those living far away.
About a quarter said they went out more and had more face-to-face contact as a result online social networking.
Half of the users aged 18 to 30 said they would “lose contact with many of their friends if they stopped”.
A few years ago, speaking to a Canberra audience, social researcher Hugh Mackay described the Gen Y culture shift this way:
“This is the most tribal generation of young Australians I’ve ever seen,” he said.
“They spend all day at school together, they get on the bus or the tram to go home, get on the mobile phone and ring each other up. And say things like ‘where are you now?’ ‘Who are you with?’ As though they can’t bear to be out of touch. And then they get home and get on the net and their parents think they’re consulting the University of Minnesota Library to do their homework, but actually they’re in a chat room with each other organising what they’re going to do in Friday night.
“And … what they’re saying to us is, ‘if you want to know how to cope with life in this very unstable, uncertain, unpredictable world, we’ll tell you. The way to cope is by mining the resources of your relationships, by keeping in touch, by connecting’.
“We’re possibly seeing the first really serious challenge to the era of individualism and the first serious embrace of a more communitarian culture.”
That was 7 years ago, but Hugh Mackay had tapped into something that many in government are only just beginning to understand.
And so through the ACT Government’s Canberra 2030 conversation and through my own online interactions my aim is to ensure that all Canberrans are heard, so we can shape our policies to meet the needs of our whole society.
Sometimes this means taking a few risks and poking some fun at the establishment in order to get the public debate moving along.
Which, ladies and gentlemen, brings me to the subject of Walter Burley Griffin.
It's not that widely known, but before the Fisher Cabinet settled on the name 'Canberra' in the early years of the last century, they considered, and rejected, two other proposed names for our city - 'Myola', and 'Shakespeare'.
Some of you might think it appropriate, given my recent comments, that I continue the Shakespearian theme and paraphrase the bard a little: "I come to bury Griffin, not to praise him."
But I’m not going to do that.
Poor Walter.
His good name has been hijacked in support of the views of every lobby group keen to enlist him to their cause.
And, the point I am making is that, being dead, he doesn’t even get a say in it.
As a recent correspondent has reminded me, he has been called on in debates on everything from the garden city of Sulman to the NCDC’s Y-plan.
Perhaps if those who passionately opposed the building of the Eiffel Tower as a modernist abomination could have invoked the Griffin legacy, they may have succeeded.
He was certainly wheeled out to oppose the Telstra Tower.
We find him a passionate advocate for both sides of many debates, but mainly on the side of ‘no change’.
And that is what I object to, because Griffin was an agent of change, not a blocker.
His plans were delayed and nearly brought undone by men of small vision, not by people who wanted to build things.
He said:
"I have planned a city that is not like any other in the world. I have planned it not in a way that I expected any government authorities in the world would accept. I have planned an ideal city - a city that meets my ideal of the city of the future."
But he did not go on to say:“and once it’s built, don’t ever change it”.
His plan was for a city of 75,000.
We have grown well beyond that.
We should now be free to make our own decisions without having to ask whether Walter would approve.
We do not have to cast back a century for answers to Canberra’s contemporary challenges.
Griffin could never have foreseen the changes in lifestyles that technology has delivered and that climate change will require.
We should not try to re-interpret his ideal of the city of the future.
It stands as we see it, and we are better for it.
But to quote Charles Landry again, we need a “Burley Griffin 2.0”.
So what does our city look like now, and how is it changing?
Whereas in 1971 Canberra was home to about 150 000 people, today, closer to 360,000 people live here.
By 2050, Canberra will house half a million people.
Between 2007 and 2056, the Territory’s number of children – fourteen years and under – will increase by 43%.
The younger working age population of eighteen to thirty-four year olds will increase by 33%.
Whilst the ACT’s ‘population ageing’ pattern is similar to much of Australia, Access Economics’ report into the ACT and Region Demographics and Trends presents an interesting picture.
The report states that “Canberra has a relative over-representation of those aged 20 to 34, and a relative under-representation of those aged 60 and over.”
Visually, this looks like an ace of spades, or a nuclear explosion, with the widest point between the 20 to 35 age bracket.
It is even more pronounced in the inner north:
What this shows is that, yes the population is ageing, but youth will continue to dominate numerically – and this will be driven by interstate migration of skilled workers and growth in our higher education institutions (a point I will return to later).
In short, Canberra will never be a ‘retirement village’, like Port Macquarie or some parts of our own South Coast. It will always be a ‘working city’, and a ‘learning city’.
So our second century as a city must be about responding to the emerging needs of the citizens of our working, learning city.
The planning of a city must deal with the contemporary issues it faces with the technologies, systems and resources it has at its disposal - while also having regard to the legacy it has inherited, the aspirations of its community and its intergenerational responsibilities.
I see the Canberra of 2030 as a progressive, inclusive and vibrant city with more to offer singles, couples and families than it does today.
A city that offers enhanced services, entertainment, hospitality and amenities for a growing local and regional community.
A place where people from many different backgrounds can live, work and play.
But fundamentally for me the future of our city has to be about two things – affordability and sustainability.
Over the next twenty years Canberra’s population will grow by around 80,000 – Griffin’s entire city in just 20 years.
We will need about 50,000 more homes in Canberra to keep up.
This growth is fairly similar to what we have experienced in the past twenty years.
But here’s the kicker.
Between now and 2030, the demographers tell us that single people and couples without children will make up 80% of the increase in households.
More of these people will want to live closer to the city, in apartments and townhouses, rather than tend to quarter acre blocks.
Current ACT Government policy backs this demographic change.
The Canberra Spatial Plan supports the development of a compact city and sets a target of 50% of future urban growth to occur within a 7.5km radius of Civic.
It also proposes keeping future urban development within 15km of Civic.
Government policy also identified where that urban consolidation will take place, and importantly, where it will not.
The higher density residential development in Canberra will leave approximately 85% of Canberra's suburban areas untouched, and will essentially occur in and around town and group centres, along transport corridors and on large brownfield sites like Eastlake.
Prior to introduction into the Territory Plan of the Garden City Provisions in 2003, the location of multi-unit development was much less controlled.
Multiunit development and urban infill has been possible throughout Canberra's suburbs prior to and since the origins of self-government, but it is only now that Canberra is really starting to focus on this process as a result of the change in demographics, the desire of the market place to have housing choice, the rising cost of living and the change in lifestyles of a dynamic community.
We are starting to see that change now.
In the past decade about half the new homes built in Canberra have been apartments or townhouses and they have been built in established areas.
Most Canberrans still choose to live in a separate house on its own land but apartments and townhouses in established areas are becoming much more popular.
It is easy to see why – they are generally located close to employment and they are much more affordable and sustainable.
For many, these housing choices provide any number of opportunities and possibilities, allowing people to do what they want to do and live in suburbs they want to live in.
Canberra is taking significant steps towards becoming more diverse and embracing different life styles and life choices.
We now have a variety of neighbourhoods, public places and private places that a range of people can enjoy.
It is about choice.
We know that many of the educated young from Canberra leave for Melbourne, Sydney or further afield after they have graduated because it lacks the excitement that they seek, whilst only some return to have a family.
How then can a city appeal to a wider audience and cater for a range of lifestyles?
In part this also requires a diversification in our economic base to promote the arts, provide for industry employment opportunities and better promote jobs in emerging technologies, particularly associated with the clean economy.
We also need to invest in the public domain of our city.
To move the ordinary into the imaginative.
The fact that this is the nation’s capital should be enough of an incentive.
However, we need to cultivate a showcase of what is possible through the reinvestment that is already taking place within established suburbs, a phenomenon not previously experienced in Canberra, but routine to other cities that are much older.
The next twenty years will be all about making the right choices to become a more affordable and sustainable city.
Making the right choices to ensure equitable access to housing, jobs and education.
Making the right choices to overcome long commutes and provide better public transport options.
Essentially it is about planning to improve livability.
And it is also about not planning.
Commentators have remarked that what Canberra lacks is a soul; that it requires some organised chaos.
We have come a long way since Gus Petersilka had to fight to put tables and chairs on the pavement outside his Civic café.
The mixed-use approach to the development of the commercial precinct of Braddon is a good model.
As the Grattan Institute identified in its 2010 Report The Cities We Need:
“Planning is indispensible to maintaining and improving cities as great places to live. But goodplanning also requires not planning; recognition that vibrant city life is partly spontaneous and that, in the long run, cities are likely to produce ways of living that we did not anticipate.
Urban planning is the ultimate policy area for balancing interests.
Balancing individualism with community needs.
Balancing the economic with the social.
And now, urban planning and design has an overriding interest – sustainability.
The average Canberran now depends on approximately 8.9 hectares of land in order to sustain their lifestyle.
This compares with the average person on the planet, who requires 1.9 hectares to survive.
In other words, if every person on the planet lived like we do, we would need four planets.
This equation is simply unsustainable.
And it is why the Government has put in place legislation for a 40% greenhouse gas reduction target.
To achieve it we are going to need higher urban density.
We need to develop our urban transport corridors.
We, along with most others in western society, will need to reappraise our patterns of consumption, along with innovation in the way we develop and live within our city.
Whilst Canberra is not now and will never be a megacity like Shanghai or New York, we nonetheless function in parallel with the challenges and changes that cities around the country and the world face.
In my view, the best way to help a community respond to challenges and change is through education.
Just as we must plan for the future, we must also educate for the future.
I would like to share two examples this evening.
Firstly, we are now installing in all our schools photovoltaic panels that collect energy and feed it into the grid.
But the really exciting part is the software that allows the children at the school to see, in real time, where and when they are using energy, and how that compares to other schools here, interstate and overseas.
It makes climate change and sustainability real for them, and allows them to have an impact by controlling their energy consumption.
Secondly, when I last visited Farrer Primary School, I helped a seven year old plant a tree in their new carbon forest. I was informed by this seven year old that planting this type of tree, during this time of the year, would sequester the most carbon.
Yes, she actually used the word ‘sequester’.
These are positive examples of the new ways we have to educate.
The generational challenges we face are significant, and education will be crucial to bridging the divides that form.
I know the University of Canberra’s is committed to lifelong learning, and I am attracted to Stephen Parker’s vision to make this a life long learning institution – from pre-school to the University of the Third Age.
In an innovation economy, Canberra will flourish or fail on its ideas and adaptability.
My hope for Canberra is that it become the most vibrant and progressive life-long learning city in Australia.
In the next few years, Australia’s tertiary and training landscape will be transformed.
In a new innovation economy it will be necessary to redefine education as an economic good, not just a social good.
The Territory will need a sophisticated export strategy for education which addresses new challenges.
We must attract more academics, teachers, lecturers, Phd students, Masters students, international students, trainees and apprentices to Canberra.
We must look to our region – and become an education and skills hub for the south coast and country New South Wales.
We must build on our strengths and our foundations.
Institutions such as the University of Canberra, Australian National University, Canberra Institute of Technology and many other private vocational and higher education providers will be the innovators who make this city into the knowledge and innovation capital of Australia.
It is the most sustainable growth we can ever imagine.
By 2050 I’d like to see more people employed in the education sector than the public service in Canberra. That is a significant challenge but something that can be achieved with the right policy settings and support from Government.
I want Canberra to be the first city in Australia to create a truly integrated, high quality, low cost and efficient tertiary and training education system.
To achieve this we must focus on students – delivering for them the courses and qualifications they want.
And we must give industry what they need - skilled and flexible workforces for the future.
Earlier this year I convened a Tertiary Taskforce to provide recommendations for reform.
The Taskforce is made up of high level representatives from our world class education providers.
Some impressive ideas have emerged.
A one-stop online education portal.
In the long term, I want to see students mixing and matching courses between institutions in the Territory.
Administrative structures and funding systems should not be the red tape that gets in the way of students creating unique combinations of qualifications.
The University of Canberra and Canberra Institute of Technology will build on their collaboration in areas such as early childhood education and forensic science, and could introduce foundation degrees.
Foundation degrees are a higher education qualification that combines academic study with work-based learning.
Degrees are jointly designed by universities, training providers and employers.
Importantly, CIT and UC will work to investigate other innovative ways to collaborate and ensure that high quality tertiary education is a key economic driver in the Territory.
The University of Canberra is leading the way in innovative partnerships between schools and universities.
A partnership between Kaleen High School and Lake Ginninderra College – soon to be called the University of Canberra High School and University of Canberra Senior Secondary College – and the University will provide strong student transitions into higher education.
This partnership will also enhance research on teacher quality and student learning.
Vocational education and training in schools and career counselling will be enhanced.
Young people in the ACT will have individual pathways plans to support their transitions from school into further education, training and employment.
This initiative will be developed as part of our ACT Youth Commitment, which has been developed to ensure that no young person in the ACT is lost from education, training or employment.
The pathways plans will help young people identify their strengths, interests and goals and outline the steps needed to attain their goals.
It will also enable young people to explore the different learning pathways available to them, and manage change.
Every young person in the ACT will be learning or earning.
The time has come for everyone in Canberra to take responsibility for our young people.
Ladies and gentlemen, our tertiary system must be easier to navigate, more connected and strive for an even higher quality.
Education in the capital must be seen as more than just good social capital – but as a key driver of economic growth.
Ladies and gentlemen, my vision for Canberra in 2030?
Canberra as a city of ideas, a city of reform.
Australia’s most liveable and vibrant modern city.
A city where every person has a home.
And where every household – no matter what its make-up – is valued, respected and included.
A city with a diversified economy built on unlimited growth of intellectual capital.
A city which leads the world in sustainable design and planning.
And a city where the apartment or townhouse is just as accepted as the quarter acre block.
Ladies and gentlemen, tonight I have given you my perspective - a Generation X perspective - on this city’s future, and my view that change is something to be welcomed and embraced.
Perhaps I could sum it up this way.
I began this lecture with an acknowledgement of Canberra’s original people.
30 or 40 years ago those words would have seemed vaguely ridiculous.
We would more likely have begun proceedings with a sign of obeisance to the Queen – perhaps even a loyal toast.
Today that would seem anachronistic.
Two very different Canberra’s in the space of a generation. I know which one I’d prefer to live in.
No comments:
Post a Comment