Heated Scene Involving Assistant Minister At Victoria Barracks Consultation
Image: Forces Command - Australian Army / Facebook
A public forum to promote the Albanese Government’s planned divestment of Victoria Barracks saw a tense exchange involving the assistant defence minister, and highlighted local opposition.
The event, run by the Department of Defence, took place on Thursday 7 May at the Paddington RSL. It was strongly attended by a mostly older crowd, largely against vacating the Army from the historic site. Also present was Wentworth MP Allegra Spender, City of Sydney councillor Zann Maxwell — a staunch proponent of repurposing the barracks — and officials from the Department of Finance, which is leading the process.
Spender has been seeking community input on divestment since the plan was announced. Speaking to the crowd, she said that of 655 responses, only two per cent supported private development.
Assistant defence minister Peter Khalil reiterated that the barracks are no longer fit for purpose, are under-utilised and are expensive to look after.
Attendees felt ignored
Rosemary Hayman is behind a petition against divestment. She told the City Hub that “the decision appears to have been made already,” with the meeting functioning “more as a procedural box‑ticking exercise than a consultation.”
Speaking at the event, she expressed doubt that private enterprise could maintain the buildings when the Government proclaims its own inability to do so. Divestment does not necessarily entail privatisation; it may see the site transferred to another public body.
Hayman felt less than heard. “When I concluded by saying that the history and memories of the military were being desecrated, Mr. Khalil responded by yelling at me. His tone was so aggressive that another audience member called out for him to stop.” Defence was approached for comment on the interaction.
One attendee asked whether Defence had sought advice from the Solicitor-General or Attorney-General on the legality of the divestment process, suggesting that the outcome had been determined prior to the opportunity for public input. “Mr. Khalil did not answer the question and instead attempted to move on.”
“The overall impression was that the process is, decide, announce, and then defend the decision, rather than consult the community meaningfully.”
“Given the heritage significance of Victoria Barracks and the strength of community opposition, I believe this warrants further scrutiny.”
A private stakeholder meeting took place on the day after the public forum.
Defence pledges to protect heritage
Earlier in the week, a Defence spokesperson said that “history and heritage planning will form a key part of the work to deliver the Future Defence Estate.”
The spokesperson affirmed “the Government’s commitment to preserve and enhance public access to significant heritage sites and collections, including at Victoria Barracks, Sydney.”
“Departments will continue to engage with key historical organisations and community groups over the coming months, including the Australian War Memorial, Shrine of Remembrance, museums and other trusts, in order to undertake this thorough history and heritage planning.”
“Defence also has legal obligations to protect heritage values through the divestment process.”
Victoria Barracks “largely unknown” to public
Maxwell, a Labor councillor and former Deputy Lord Mayor, chaired a panel discussion at Sydney Town Hall on 30 April to discuss ideas for the barracks’ reutilisation.
He noted that it constitutes “one of the finest examples of colonial barracks in Australia,” with Georgian sandstone buildings that have “no equal across the country.” However, he continued, “the precinct remains largely unknown to the public.”
Sydney has “many historic buildings and precincts which have been carried by their communities beyond their original uses into a second life,” Maxwell said.
“Some, like the Female Orphan School in Parramatta, are substantially older than Victoria Barracks. Some, like the spectacular building that we’re in right now, fulfil their original purpose as well today as they did more than 100 years ago. But according to the Federal Government’s Defence Estate Audit, the same cannot be said about Victoria Barracks anymore.”
Maxwell released a design concept for the site in April, featuring eateries, shops, cricket and adjacent units.
The Barracks should be kept in Government ownership. The Heritage must be preserved but the site could be converted into a Public Housing Estate, not private homes for the rich.
I’m sick to death of reading proposals for the sell off of public land to be developed with homes for the rich. Darling Harbour is one example, the former Fish Markets site at Blackwattle Bay is another and now we have the NSW Cabinet proposing harbourside apartments (again for the rich) on Glebe Island which will result on the transportation of bulk materials essential for the construction industry – aggregate, cement, sand, gypsum – by trucks from Port Kembla. This will add hugely to the cost of construction in Sydney.
Dear Editor,
Excuse my non-commercial naïveté but my I suggest Victoria Barracks could be converted under the control of our exemplary public health system to become housing for dementia patients, operating as an inner city sanctuary with doctors, nurses and therapists on site in a secure community, allowing family and friends controlled access for visits.