Page 4099 - Week 14 - Thursday, 25 October 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the Playhouse, with its lack of technical excellence, because they can afford it for many of their productions. It is an excellent little theatre and we have made many comments about it. We do, of course, recognise that, if some other decision were to be made in some other place or in this place that would lead to its destruction, it would, of course, have to be replaced with a new theatre.
There are some of us who would be distressed about that, but that is a personal matter. We would raise the question, as is raised here: what is theatre? Theatre is not bricks and mortar and technical buildings, although you certainly need those. Theatre is what can happen on the street or in any building or in any location where imagination and creativity take place with human beings in a number of situations which can be described as drama. Surely, the Playhouse has represented that. So, we are unanimous in endorsing the usefulness and value of the Playhouse and regret any suggestions that it be pulled down.
I now come to the question of what has been promised. I would point out that public opinion surveys done by the casino inquiry under Geoff Caldwell were done on the assumption that there would be a territorial library and so-called lyric theatre in return for sanctioning a casino. (Extension of time granted) The assumption in those surveys - I wish I had one in front of me - was something like this: given that the public would receive a territorial library and a lyric theatre, would you approve of, et cetera, et cetera. That assumption was there, no matter what promises would be made. I suspect that, if you asked the people who have been following this matter for about two years what would be received and returned for a casino, they would say: a library and some theatres.
Finally, I would like to come to this question of a territorial library. We will be raising this again, of course, as we come to the conclusion of the report. May I stress, though, at this point that we are not talking about some larger version of what is now in the North Building. We are not talking about one branch of the ACT library system, not even a super luxury branch perhaps to be compared to that marvellous branch in Tuggeranong, which surely must be one of the most attractive libraries in the whole of our city. This territorial library is to be a necessary part of the very fact that we are a separate State and/or Territory under self-government.
The National Library has reached the point where it is telling us that it cannot continue to service us in the same way that it has been doing in the past. Indeed, I understand that questions were even being raised about readers' tickets. The National Gallery and the National Library have national roles, as one day the national theatre will have a national role. We have to find a way to fill that gap, to create a State/territorial library which is comparable to the State/territorial libraries in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .