Page 2866 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 17 September 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Let me go to recommendation 20. Again, the Childers Group suggested that the government establish a full-time arts officer and that that person be embedded in the education directorate to assist with education. But no. The government response was:
Not agreed.
The Education and Training Directorate (ETD) has existing established structures to facilitate and support arts education in ACT public schools.
The whole suggestion was that someone who had been in the arts world as an arts person should go into education so that they could use their knowledge and their experience to assist with education. We should always be open to the suggestion that relevant and appropriate outside individuals come into our education system and assist. We clearly did not see that. We clearly do not see that. The art community does not see that. The art community is concerned about it. Again, it is a good suggestion that was made that really could have helped.
There is a real failure of the ACT government in this. Yes, there is a framework, but there is no real strategy to make it happen. You hear from many arts groups that they are concerned about their funding. What about ArtSound FM? We know that part of the proposal is that they might shift from Manuka so that Manuka Oval can be redeveloped, and that they may end up in the arts precinct that apparently will be occurring at Kingston foreshore. But the real question was about that vital infrastructure that they have built up. How does it move? How do they get there? What guarantees will the government give that they are not disadvantaged by the government’s desire to redevelop the land around Manuka.
We know that part of the framework talks about these sorts of things, making sure that there is appropriate infrastructure for support. That is good, but how are you going to ensure that existing infrastructure, when you want to move it, is not disadvantaged? Again, those concerns are there; those concerns are real. The last time I spoke with ArtSound they said that they are really not getting a great feeling of security about the government’s intention. It has been built up. They have lost their key arts status. A lot of us, I think, felt that was questionable because it is one of those real venues to allow people, through the medium of the radio, to be able to access art in the ACT. There is a lot of local art that features on that station.
We can go off to the cultural ministers meeting in Alice Springs in October. We can take on the federal government to say that the Australia Council on the Arts currently does not fund the ACT. But at the heart of it, if you are not getting it right before you start throwing stones, the old “people in glass houses” line, you should really look at your own framework, your own structure, what you are delivering and how you are making it work, and really work out whether or not you could be doing things better.
We have not heard any evidence for the motion. We have got a swag of quotes that have been apparently taken from other documents. We seem to be waving the Minister for the Arts farewell and wishing her bon voyage as she travels off to Alice Springs for the cultural ministers meeting in October. It is important for ministers to go to meetings where it is appropriate.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video