Page 2283 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 9 May 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I appreciate there is probably not a lot the ACT can do about the ANU; the ANU is not run by the ACT government. But I think it is very good that we are debating this issue. I point out that the major call of Mrs Dunne’s motion—which I absolutely 100 per cent agree with—is something the Greens have already done. The Greens have written to the vice-chancellor to express our concern about the proposed changes at the School of Music from an industrial relations and educational point of view and from the point of view of the musical community both within ANU and more widely within the ACT. Yes, I totally agree with Mrs Dunne’s proposed outcome.
But I would like to see more than that happen. I am trying to add to Mrs Dunne’s motion and include that we note the concerns of students and staff about a lack of meaningful consultation conducted by ANU with their staff and student body regarding recent proposed changes. That is important as well as the musical issues, as I said. Proposed paragraph 1(f) notes the potential negative impacts these cuts will have on staffing, course options, educational quality and the broader musical community. I have been told by Mrs Dunne’s office that she does not think we should have these changes because she thinks my paragraph 1(f) is the same as hers, but it is not, actually. Her paragraph 1(e) just refers to consequent impacts. I think it is important for the Assembly to note that we are concerned about potential negative impacts.
We are not just having this debate because there is a change. We think some of these changes may not be positive. I do not think we would be having this debate if we all thought it was positive. As I said, the concerns about meaningful consultation are important. Ms Burch’s original proposed amendment was going to include that, but her revised version has cut it out, so I hope that the Assembly will still support this.
The other thing I wanted to add was another call—that is, for the Chief Minister to write to the Hon Simon Crean MP, Minister for the Arts, requesting that the Canberra Symphony Orchestra receives a more equitable distribution of existing federal government funding to Australia’s symphony orchestras. This motion is not primarily about the Canberra Symphony Orchestra, but, as Mrs Dunne mentioned, the relationship between the Canberra Symphony Orchestra and the School of Music is very close. The School of Music is where the Canberra Symphony Orchestra gets most of its players from.
The federal government supports symphony orchestras in every state of Australia but they do not support the Canberra Symphony Orchestra. In Melbourne the Victorian Symphony Orchestra gets $10 million a year from the federal government. Given the federal government’s current budgetary issues I would not be so optimistic as to suggest they would be spending more money on Australia’s symphony orchestras. But I think it is reasonable for the ACT Assembly to suggest that we should have a more equitable share of the funding for Australia’s symphony orchestras. In fact, we should have some of it, because currently we have none of it. That is the second of my amendments.
I have been informed that neither the Liberal nor Labor parties will be supporting my amendments, and I regret that. I really think it is reasonable to suggest that the ACT’s
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video