Page 4116 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 26 November 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I do not have a textbook to quote from but I do have two publications, in fact, and they are publications, again, from when Mr Smyth had the opportunity to sit on this side of the fence. They are two Housing ACT newsletters. The first, back in January 2000, has a number of photos. I cannot remember; it could be 14 photos. Fifty per cent or more of the images are of Mr Smyth. He has used a government publication for nothing more than his own propaganda to get his name out. The publications back in 2000 were the Housing ACT newsletter.
This is Mr Smyth’s policy development on the back page. It has a crossword—a crossword in an ACT publication—and the first crossword clue across, the number one clue, is: “ACT Minister for Housing”. Mr Smyth, Brendan Smyth, is including his name in crosswords in government publications. That is what Mr Smyth’s policy attributes are. He will do nothing, other than cheap stunts that use his name in the crosswords. He will use government publications that put him in 50 per cent of the images. He stands here as a so-called policy expert with a government, with an opposition, with a party that wants to ban public art but at the same time, when he gets the opportunity, he cannot stick himself in front of a camera quickly enough.
The arts policy framework has four overarching principles: to facilitate community participation in access to art, to support artistic excellence, to strengthen the capacity of arts to contribute to social and economic outcomes, to foster artistic innovation, creativity and sustainability. Let us go to the first principle. Some examples under this are—and the framework is guided by this and this is the result; this is the outcome—increased support for the Canberra Symphony Orchestra, with an additional $100,000; delivered the artists in schools program; undertook a strategic asset management plan; strengthened arts hubs at Gorman House and Ainslie Arts Centre; built additional rehearsal rooms at Street Theatre; set up an online SmartyGrants application system for grants funds; and strengthened the Tuggeranong and Belconnen arts centres.
On principle No 2, some examples are: funded initiatives through the arts which allow artists to gain local, national and international success; introduced more flexible funding; established a coordinated artists in residence program and upgraded Strathnairn Homestead. On principle No 3, which is about sustainability, we have recognised that arts is a changing landscape. The Canberra Glassworks continues to grow and develop. Megalo is reaching unprecedented levels. The Tuggeranong and Belconnen arts centres are consolidating those roles and have been supported to meet new requirements.
We have also commenced scoping research to better understand the economic and social benefits of investment in the arts and have assisted in the merger between Music For Everyone and Canberra Youth Music, all part of strengthening the sustainability and capacity of our arts sector.
These achievements and many more are enormous outcomes for what is 0.6 per cent of the ACT government’s budget. But this list does not even go near the detail of the work undertaken. I have outlined how this framework guides the government’s policies in arts. However, as I said, the arts framework is a living document and it is therefore not necessary for it to be under everyday review as it is implemented, but the decisions are reflective of the goals and the ambitions of the framework.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video