Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (18 June) . . Page.. 1780 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

We have had little pockets of assets and little pockets of opportunity, if you like, scattered across the Territory, I think, in a relatively unproductive way. The Canberra Theatre, set up with its own little trust to run the activities of the Canberra Theatre and the Playhouse, is one example. We have more recently had an interim board for the then Canberra Cultural Centre, now the Canberra Museum and Gallery, doing its own job quite separately from that. There is very little interaction between the two. Calthorpes' House, Lanyon, Mugga Mugga and so on are heritage assets, yes; cultural assets, yes. They are placed throughout the Territory without any real attempt at integration with those other assets that I referred to. I think that is unfortunate. I think there is an opportunity facing us to be able to better use those assets for the benefit of the people of the ACT.

I have to emphatically reject the suggestion by Mr Wood that this has been a process not accompanied by extensive consultation. That is simply not true. When the Government wrote to people in the arts community in the ACT - and I sat there for some time signing a large pile of letters to such people - - -

Mr Wood: When was that?

MR HUMPHRIES: In January; the letter was in January.

Ms Tucker: That is not consultation.

MR HUMPHRIES: Hang on! It is consultation. The Government said, "We are proposing to move down this path; we have appointed an interim authority; we are proposing to legislate. Here is what we are talking about doing and saying to people. Make your comments. We are here to talk about these things".

Ms Tucker: You did not say, "Make your comments"; you said, "Any inquiries". It sounds like it is just done. It is information, not consultation.

MR HUMPHRIES: Ms Tucker says that the invitation to comment was not forthright enough. I have never observed people involved in the arts in the ACT as being backward when it comes to making very strong comments on areas of this kind. They usually make those comments without the slightest invitation or provocation, I might say. They usually make them very forcefully. Indeed, some did make comments. Although very few made them to the Government, they made them in other forums; and that is, perhaps, a bit unfortunate.

Subsequently, the Government did develop draft legislation, and it circulated that as well to those other people. I wrote to those people and invited them, more explicitly perhaps, to make comments. I do not have the letter in front of me. I do not know what the date was, but it was subsequent to the legislation being developed. The date on which the legislation was prepared was 8 May. People generally had that legislation made available to them. I subsequently wrote to people and gave them a copy of the legislation.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .