Page 4645 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 27 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
was, they were secure. They simply do not have that sort of confidence in the current Government. Maybe if this Government had put some clear mechanisms into their legislation, if they had inbuilt that - and it is entirely possible to do so - there would be some grounds for confidence; but a simple assurance that they can have confidence will do nothing at all to help them.
The arts groups, for example, are concerned. Mr Collaery has claimed levels of consultation; but I know, as I talk to people in the arts community, that they are not particularly fussed about this. There is a wait and see attitude. They wish that there were more clear mechanisms displayed for them. They wish that there was some greater strength than a simple assurance by a government that has not the confidence of the people of the ACT. Along with this is the tradition - and this is a compounding factor - of arm's-length funding.
That has always been the case with the CDF being more remote from the Federal Government. I do not know of any occasions when recommendations were not accepted. Not only are we changing the mechanism but what we are doing now, what Mr Humphries for one is doing, is changing the processes. We have seen only in the last couple of weeks two examples. There is an example where he has accepted the recommendation from that arm's-length group, the Arts Development Board. He accepted their recommendation not to fund a very good body in the ACT. He was happy to accept it.
Mr Humphries: You did not fund it either.
MR WOOD: I realise some of that argument, but it is the process I am talking about. Bear that in mind. He accepted that, but when the Canberra Theatre Company comes in - a moribund company, right?
Mr Humphries: You funded it.
MR WOOD: Not when it was moribund, thank you. A moribund company comes in. The Arts Development Board says, "Do not fund it. It is dead". He says, "No, I will not take your advice. So, the concept of arm's-length funding, which has long been associated with these things we are talking about tonight, is now under question.
I would have thought that some time down the track, after the Government knew what it was going to do and after announcements were made, the Government would have come in and said, "Now, these are the processes by which the recommendations will be made for the distribution of funds". But, of course, as is the case with all their planning, no such announcements are being made. There has been ample time; let me repeat that. Why has not the Minister, or the Chief Minister, as he has brought this in at this time, stood up here and said, "Now, these are the mechanisms"? All we have is a vague statement, a range of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .