Page 113 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 15 February 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
certainly were tensions there. It is sad that they then went ahead and, instead, disbanded the body.
Mr Hargreaves told the Assembly in October 2003 that MACMA was established because:
… the ACT government values feedback from the multicultural community in any of its forms. That is why the Chief Minister has the advisory council.
The role and mission of that council were clearly stated, and we entirely agree with that. As I have said before, how are you now going to get the quick and uncluttered advice that you always need to get if you do not have that council in place?
Clearly those words stated in October 2003 were simply rhetoric. The government is happy to let them float about of their own accord without any proper direction, or official advisory capacity, to ensure a proper and coordinated two-way exchange between the multicultural community and the government.
There is a failure of leadership, and this is a failure of leadership on the part of government. Governments have to govern by example. Even if they do not have their fingers in all the pies, they have to be able to set the example and set the conditions to allow looser organisations, which are an important part of the ACT community, to function properly. So there are questions about that.
I wonder now whether the government will favour the views or the input of one of the two multicultural bodies over the other. I do not think they will. I get the impression that the minister would prefer to see both the ACT Multicultural Council, despite the fact that it is in disarray—and the minister believes that, RMA believes that, and I believe that—and the new multicultural community forum operate alongside each other. We support that; we agree with that.
Clearly, if the broader ACT community feels better if they have got a council in place and a forum in place, and they can both represent the diverging views of the broader community, fine. But the challenge will be now with you, Minister, as to whether you can maintain your links with both of those bodies, get that advice and assist the community to undertake its functions, without there being other tensions. The minister is right to say, “Let us leave it to the community to allow one of those bodies, or both of those bodies, to perform properly.” But the minister will still have the leadership responsibility to ensure that matters of expenditure and funding are carried out properly and are held well accountable.
I do not criticise the formation of the multicultural community forum, and I certainly do not call for the disbandment of the Multicultural Council even though it has reached the point where it is dysfunctional. It will be interesting to see where things go. It will be a challenge for you, Minister.
Dr Foskey raised the point that, while we do not have the conditions here in the ACT for the race-based riots that we have seen in Cronulla, the ACT community needs to remain on its guard. That is entirely right. By the way, I do not want Dr Foskey to be called a scaremongerer for having raised that, as the government is sometimes wont to do. It
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .