Page 2627 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 24 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Those two examples, I think, remind us of the fact that we must not view the arts as being something at the fringe, something which you find only in a theatre or in a concert hall. There is one particular point also arising from that comment, that is, a reference to architecture, which I think is worth making. Architecture, and public art which goes with architecture, is a very important element of the arts which I suspect in the ACT is an area which we as a community do not give enough attention to.
Certainly, architecture and public art are important components of national institutions in the ACT. The role for architecture and public art in all significant construction in the Territory has not been very great. I think, Madam Speaker, that we need to be looking at this question. We cannot expect, for example, the private sector in the ACT to make a significant effort to put those values, those elements of any project, at a high order of priority if we ourselves, that is, the ACT, as a major constructor of buildings in the Territory, do not similarly give a high priority to those things.
Madam Speaker, the best example I can think of of that principle at work is the construction of the new ACT Legislative Assembly building. I have no criticisms of the building, given the constraints of cost; but we must bear in mind that that building has little architectural merit and very little application of public art.
Mr Wood: Oh, come now! Many people treasure it.
Mr De Domenico: Externally.
MR HUMPHRIES: The plans I have seen have no indication of public art anywhere in the building. I make it clear, Madam Speaker, that when I say "public art" I do not mean just a picture slapped up on a wall. I mean art which is integral to the construction and design of that building, whether it be built into the framework of the building, such as mosaics or architectural features, or something of that kind, or whether it be art which is designed for the place in which it stands. I think, Madam Speaker, that we need to be looking at that question very seriously.
Another issue I want to raise, and a problem which this Government will face, is consultation on the arts. The Cultural Council is necessarily an exclusive body. It is not a substitute for direct discussion between the arts community and the ACT Government. Arm's-length funding, in the same style as the Australian Government has the Australia Council, does not exempt the Government from a close relationship and close dialogue with the arts community. Madam Speaker, I talked, when I was Minister, about the concept of elbow-length funding, that is, funding which is initially the work of an independent source of advice but which is also proffered and implemented by an informed government. I chose to inform myself when I was Minister through the agency of the Arts Forum. It gave members of the arts community a chance for direct dialogue with the Government, and the Government's role, no matter how much arm's-length funding you create, is vitally important in the arts. Governments of various hues are the modern-day equivalent of the Medicis. They are the major suppliers of funding for the arts in this country, far - - -
Mrs Carnell: That mob have a lot in common with the Medicis.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .