Australia's New Parliament House gets fenced in. Is it symbolic or strategic? Will my granddaughter understand?

Every day we pick up the papers and read about a world in turmoil. Most would agree its great to live in Australia. Yes, in turmoil but for different reasons. What goes on inside our Parliament is a good example. It is hard at times to imagine we are one country. Our politicians have to make grand gestures to show they are on top of the trust Australian's put in them. Money seems no object when grand gestures are made. But are some of these gestures the right ones, and how will some of these ever get undone?

Having had the privilege of of leading the 10,000 member construction team who contributed to the making of this building, I know how saddened all will feel about its progressive enclosure and the increasing isolation of our elected members. I am more certain that the millions who visit and are inspired by the humble design that allows capitol hill to fold gently over the building, below which our humble representatives are supposed to toil, symbolically acknowledging this relationship will feel in the future.

Such a design concept would not have got a look in today. Every Australian should revisit the designs that were not selected to see what we could have had on Capitol Hill. It is a very sad turn of events to see the symbolic reaction to the recent terror events at home and abroad now reasoning abandoning the chosen design and our politicians bunkering down as a gesture that she'll be right, if we just put up this big new fence.

My lasting memory of the building will be the joy my granddaughter and hundreds of thousands of other young Australians have had frolicking on its grassy slopes.

Last week's Sourceable article reminded me of the number of people over the last year who have contacted me and asked 'isn't there something we can do Dave?' My answer has been to accept the inevitable and remain quiet. I am uncomfortable with this. I think we should be speaking up and making a stand for future Australians. There has to be a better solution. We seem to find locking things up as the preferred assurance these days. That is not who we are, and its not a sign that we will get on, come what may. I thought I heard a politician say we should not bow our heads to fear. Oh.

History has shaped this building. Firstly the Hilton bombing settled that the Executive wing of the New Parliament House would move internally. Another reason was that the then PM Malcom Fraser didn't like the smell of bacon and eggs being cooked on the external lights by protesters camping on the lawns of the Old Parliament House. But the preferred design was for an open accessible building. Giurgola's design made sense then and it still does today. Yes, with a few more bollards but not this fence. Surely.

The second interruption to the building was John Howard axing the non-members bar. This was the place pollies, the media and public could rub shoulders. It was all to leaky, as Paul Eddington who played the memorable (and honourable) Jim Hacker forecast. It was just all too 'Yes Minister' to control. It was a great day to witness Jim pulling the first beer in the old Non-Members bar. A big loss to the building. More bunkering.

Now we have the fence. Its lucky that Aldo Giurgola did not live to see this. There was always a security overhang in designing the New Parliament, while it was initially built (and no it does not have a nuclear shelter). But, surely a better solution could have been found. This is our national Parliament, it is the peoples building. Just look at what a loved and visited national asset it is. The War Memorial, the Opera House, Ayres Rock all in a similar public place. No-one would dare put a fence up like the one proposed.

As a very proud old builder, I urge you Prime Minister to try harder for a better solution. I hear all Aussies echoing this call. And, especially my granddaughters and grandsons.