Page 1162 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 30 May 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
given around an extension of time for noise on those particular nights, perhaps traded off with another part of the day. That is something that should be explored further.
In terms of the planning issues that arise, it is important that through the planning system we give greater certainty of operations for live music venues. Some success has been achieved in liaison with venue managers, supported by compliance measures and compliance responses that truly reflect the situation. I have particular concerns in my electorate of Molonglo around a couple of venues that have arrived after the residential component. I am talking specifically around Edgar’s Inn in Ainslie and All Bar Nun in O’Connor. I know there have been issues for the residents who have been just across the street from these venues for some time.
There has been a constructive response to working through these issues, with the government seeking to regulate activity to ensure that the total amenity for residents is not lost. But people living in that area do need to acknowledge that they are living in an entertainment precinct and that that is part of what people desire when making a decision to live in such areas.
Dr Foskey raised some issues around how governments in other jurisdictions have provided funding for venues to improve their sound insulation, and that is a very relevant point. We also need to look more broadly at what the building code of Australia says about insulation. The government is supportive of changes to sound insulation rules that will make live entertainment more viable and that reflect the current changes in urban design, provided, of course, that the costs and benefits are properly assessed and that health and safety issues are not compromised. So further work can be done at a national level around those building codes.
Finally in the time that remains to me on this issue, something that has been overlooked in this debate is the removal of funding from university student associations and the ability for universities to be live music venues. I certainly remember from my time at the ANU, as treasurer of the students association back in the early nineties—
Mr Mulcahy: I hope you were better than some of the other Labor appointees.
MR BARR: I can think of a variety of up-and-coming bands that were sponsored through the students association through the use of the student union as a music venue and other venues at the university. It is sad that, whilst those opposite, for ideological reasons, have sought to remove the capacity of students associations and student unions to fund those collective activities, what we are seeing is another impact on live music and the opportunity for younger bands to come through.
A certain band that the ANU Students Association from 1992 through 1994 supported in their establishment was a band called the Whitlam’s, who prior to their commercial success through Triple J in the late nineties were given their start and the opportunity to progress their musical talent through universities. Whilst there is still a live music scene on our campuses, there is no doubt that, particularly in regional areas, those activities have suffered as a result of a broader policy decision made by the federal government. It is interesting that they have acknowledged that by having taxpayers fund some of those facilities in regional universities. The difficulty for us here in the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .