OLD PARLIAMENT HOUSE AND CURTILAGE HERITAGE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2008–2013

D. History of the Place
Part D – Appendices
Old Parliament House and Curtilage Heritage Management Plan 2008–2013
285
by the oregon beams. The small post office was removed from King’s Hall at this time, too. One noteworthy
change of the war period that led to serious consequences for the building in the early post-war years was
the decision, based either on a shortage of materials or on ill-considered cost-cutting grounds, to discontinue
varnishing the building’s external woodwork. Tests during the construction of the building and in 1937 had
shown that, whatever type of varnish was used, it broke down on the external timber of the Representatives side
in eighteen months and on the Senate side, which was exposed to the westering sun, in a mere six months. With
no varnish coating applied to the external woodwork for much of the war, it deteriorated badly in this period. In
1949, moves were commenced to protect and conceal the weathered external timbers by painting them. 46
Despite the welcome augmentation of office space provided by alterations and the construction of the two new
wings, accommodation in the provisional building remained at a premium. As early as February 1943, H.C.
Barnard, the Member for Bass, addressed a question to the Minister for Post War Reconstruction, Ben Chifley,
as to whether there were any plans to erect a permanent parliamentary building, in view of the shortage of
accommodation in the existing structure. Chifley replied that the matter would be considered as part of the
program of post-war reconstruction. Three years later, however, Harold Holt put a similar question to him, pointing
out that a new building would be needed if a mooted increase in the number of parliamentarians went ahead.
Responding, Chifley said that no decision had been made and again promised that the matter would be considered,
this time by the Minister for Works and Housing. 47 In the end, no decision was forthcoming and the whole question
of a permanent building was soon overtaken by the march of events. The pressure on the Provisional Parliament
House now threatened to become intolerable unless urgent steps were taken to enlarge the building again.
The development which led to the enlargement was a long-overdue decision to increase the numbers of
parliamentarians. When the Commonwealth was first established in 1901, the Constitution stipulated
that the number of parliamentarians would be determined on the basis of a quota obtained by dividing the
nation’s population by twice the number of senators; the Constitution further laid down that the number of
members should be as nearly as possible double the number of Senators. By 1948, the nation’s population
had more than doubled since 1901 leading to a corresponding increase in the number of people each
member was expected to represent and a resultant growth in their workload. To redress the situation, the
number of senators was raised to sixty in 1948 and, thereupon, the number of members to 121, thus giving
a total number of parliamentarians of 181. 48 This was in excess of the projected total number of 168
that it was originally thought that the provisional building would ever need to accommodate in its 50 year
history. As it was, additional space was required to cater for the expansion of other activities associated
with Parliament, notably the work of the press gallery. The electronic media, in particular, grew following
the commencement in July 1946 of direct radio coverage of Question Time in Parliament by the ABC. 49 By
April 1948, Chifley admitted that the press was ‘very unhappily’ accommodated in Parliament House. 50
With much of the building already in the hands of the executive and no plans to erect a permanent
building, there was now no choice but to expand the existing structure. The solution adopted was to add
a third storey to each of the 1943 wings and extend them with three-storey right-angle returns so that
they joined each end of the dining-recreation block. As the wings had never been intended to support
upper floors, their walls had to be thickened and strengthened to bear the extra load. The plans for the
extensions were drawn by D.G. Edward, an architect in the Department of Works. On 14 July 1948, a
contract was let for the construction work to the builders, John Grant and Sons of Martin Place, Sydney,
with a finishing date of 31 March 1949; the plasterwork was later undertaken by Hook Brothers of
Harrington Street, Sydney. A notable feature of the additions was that the contractors were constrained
to use Australian timber, in this case Queensland maple, for all joinery and timber panelling. 51
Owing to various problems, work on the third storey dragged on for a long time after the date of completion
initially stipulated for it, and the cost blew out from the original budget estimate of £45 000 to just over
£140 000. When complete, however, the extensions provided fifty additional offices, two attendants’ boxes
and four toilets, and included extra space for the press gallery on the upper floor next to the chambers. At
the same time, seating accommodation in the Representatives and Senate chambers was increased to provide
respectively for up to 124 members and 60 senators. Substantial additions and improvements were also
made to the facilities for parliamentarians and press representatives in the dining-recreational block at the
rear of the original building, the old billiard room being converted into a dining area. Welcome and necessary
as these changes were, they still did not provide the majority of parliamentarians with their own offices. 52
46 Tanner and Associates, ‘Provisional Parliament House Canberra: The Conservation Plan’, pp. 14-5 to 14-8; ms minute, Christie, ‘Renovation and Maintenance of External Woodwork of Parliament House’, 7 March 1949; Joint Standing Committee
on the New Parliament House, ‘Report on the Future Use of the Provisional Parliament House’, May 1984, section 2.15; minute, Chairman, Joint House Committee, to N. Lemmon, Minister for Works and Housing, 22 June 1949, CRS A6728/1,
item 191/6.
47 H.C. Barnard and J.B. Chifley, in Hansard [HReps], 10 February 1943, CRS A461, item B4-1-10; Harold Holt and Chifley, in Hansard [HReps], 5 April 1946, CRS A461/7, item A4/1/10; Canberra Times, 5 April 1946.
48 Geoffrey Sawer, The Australian Constitution, Canberra, AGPS, 1975, pp. 44-5; Souter, Acts of Parliament, pp. 395-6.
49 Dick, Parliament House Canberra Golden Jubilee, p. 32.
50 Chifley, in Hansard [HReps], CRS A461/7, item A4/1/10.
51 ‘Extract from Minutes of the 68th Meeting [of the NCPDC]’, 21-2 June 1948, CRS A3032/1, item PC46/1; documents relating to third storey in CRS A976/64, item 52/0239 part 1; Souter, Acts of Parliament, p. 397; Tanner and Associates,
‘Provisional Parliament House Canberra: The Conservation Plan’, p. 14-8; Joint Standing Committee on the New Parliament House, ‘Report on the Future Use of the Provisional Parliament House’, May 1984, section 2.15.
52 Memorandum, L.F. Loder, Director-General, Department of Works and Housing, to R.M. Taylor, Director of Works, Canberra, ‘Extensions to Parliament House’, 4 May 1951; and, on same file, Department of Works Completion Report:
‘Alterations to Parliament House’, CRS A976/64, item 52/0239 part 4; Emerton, ‘The Case for a Permanent Building’, p. 9; Tanner and Associates, ‘Provisional Parliament House Canberra: The Conservation Plan’, pp. 14-5, 14-8.