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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 11 Hansard (29 November) . . Page.. 3431 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Obviously, the decisions made by the federal government in relation to funding of institutions like the Australian National University have driven decisions by the university council to downgrade the administration of this most important and unique national asset. It is not the first time we have seen the implications of federal government decisions in relation to funding cuts flowing through to important programs and research and important collections like the Noel Butlin Archives.

This year we saw the demise of another unique program at the Australian National University: the urban research program, the first and the only unit at an Australian university dedicated to the study of urban research policy. For the Australian National University, in the most urbanised country on the planet, to abolish that program was an appalling decision. If allowed to proceed, the decision to downgrade the administration of the Noel Butlin Archives will be an equally appalling decision.

It is important that we recognise that the ANU has a pre-eminent role in postgraduate study and research; that the national capital is the place for archives of significance such as the Noel Butlin Archives; and that the archives are a vital tool in research. The Assembly has a responsibility on behalf of the people of Canberra to voice our concern about downgrading the status of this significant collection.

I hate to think what the person the archives are named after, Noel Butlin, would think of a decision by the ANU to substantially downgrade access to this most important collection. Noel Butlin was a scholar of immense renown and reputation, a scholar of the humanities who was rightly given the honour of having his name appended to these archives. We as a community should express our concern that the ANU is failing in its responsibilities to properly maintain and provide access to these archives if it continues with the decision it has made to cut funding to the archives from next year.

I commend the motion to the Assembly.

MR STEFANIAK (Minister for Education and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General) (5.52): I note from Mr Wood's amended motion that he is following a correct process. That is certainly worth putting on the record. His motion notes certain matters and then requests the Chief Minister to pass on to the relevant federal minister the Assembly's concern and requests our minister to take up the matter with the Australian National University. As Mr Wood has this concern, he could write to Dr Kemp himself and ask him to do this.

Mr Wood: Yes, I will. But I am only one person.

MR STEFANIAK: He interjects and says he will. I am delighted that he will do that. I would caution him that even should the federal minister accede to the request it is ultimately a matter for the Australian National University. They have a budget to look to. They very much administer their own affairs. They have taken this decision. I do not know whether Mr Wood's plea will fall on receptive ears or ultimately on deaf ears. But if he wishes to make this point, that is a matter for him. Conversely, the university might take the attitude that if the Assembly wants to interfere in their affairs they can tell us how we should run our affairs. You always run that risk.

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