Page 3846 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 8 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Apparently, all that has gone out the window now; and we are prepared to put up with this concept of the National Museum basically being a wan vestige of its original self, not on the original site, and with very little prospect of developing into the National Museum which this Opposition and, we thought, this Government had committed themselves to. This is an important facility for Canberra. Do we see the Government standing up for Canberra? No; we see it saying, "Yes, we are happy to accept the Gallery of Aboriginal Australia. Yes, it is a wonderful thing. Thank you very much, Prime Minister. We will take the money, such as it is, and run". That is unacceptable.
Looking through the Government's promises on cultural matters, I notice that before the last election it promised to commit itself to putting aside a certain percentage of the development cost of major new buildings for public art. That was a promise made in very explicit terms before the 1992 election. Has it happened? No, it has not. The Government is still in the process of developing that proposal. No doubt the Minister can tell us that it is going to happen very soon, but he told us that three years ago.
Madam Speaker, all in all, if I were the Government, I would not count on a major advertising campaign based on the arts. I certainly would not count on gaining much support in the arts community by saying how wonderful they think that the Gallery of Aboriginal Australia is, because I have not met anybody involved in the arts in Canberra who happens to think that this is a good thing. The gallery, in its own right, of course, is a quite important development. Even the Government, in its heart of hearts, realises that it represents the end of the concept of the National Museum of Australia as originally put forward. You could not put the museum, at least as originally conceived, on Acton Peninsula. We will end up with either the sort of museum which Paul Keating talked about - a mausoleum that was unacceptable; a museum of great halls and showcases; and not an open plan, interactive exercise - or a museum over a variety of sites, if we are lucky, in the ACT.
Mr Berry: You should not have closed the hospital, Gary.
Mrs Grassby: If you had not closed the hospital, they could not have put it there.
MR HUMPHRIES: It is worth $45m to you lot now; so, you should be pretty happy about that. That is $45m that you did not have before. Most likely, I have to say, Madam Speaker, we are going to see the National Museum turn into a travelling roadshow. We are not going to see it in Canberra, except maybe once every nine months when it happens to come through town like a circus. That is what we are going to see happen to the National Museum.
Mr Kaine: Or every 10 years.
MR HUMPHRIES: Or every 10 years, more likely, as my colleague Mr Kaine points out. That is going to be the reality of the matter. I am not happy about that. That is a sell-out, in my book. But do we see this Government standing by that concept of a museum? No, we do not. No; they have been told, "Fall into line with the Feds because that is your duty", and they have done it. Madam Speaker, that should put the nail well and truly in the coffin of this Government on the question of its performance in cultural matters.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .