Page 4242 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 21 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I think I have heard Ms Le Couteur say something similar. The government, through its percent-for-art scheme, missed a real opportunity for the development of the arts in Canberra. That has been the Canberra Liberals’ criticism of the percent-for-art scheme, as it has been the criticism of the Loxton report for the percent-for-art scheme. As I have said before, the percent-for-art scheme was poorly targeted and non-strategic and it has a litany of missed opportunities behind it. By contrast, the policy position on public art that the Canberra Liberals took to the 2008 election was for a much more strategic focus on public art.
Far from criticising the opposition for this attitude towards the percent-for-art scheme, a scheme also criticised by the Loxton report and derided in the community, the government should be taking a serious look at the report’s recommendations. But what was the government’s response? It was in-principle support, but with qualifications that it would be subject to future budget considerations. There is no firm commitment from this government on any public art scheme, much less addressing the deficiencies of the percent-for-art scheme raised by Loxton.
Dr Bourke would also do well to review other aspects of the Canberra Liberals’ arts policy statement. In there, he will see we proposed an arts biennale with seed funding of $1 million. He will see we committed additional funding of $175,000 over four years to support a larger base of artsACT project funding. He will see we committed an additional $100,000 per year for the Canberra Symphony Orchestra, plus funding of $30,000 a year for the Canberra Pops Orchestra. I note that the Canberra Pops Orchestra is no longer, for want of funding and sponsorship. The funding we committed would have ensured the continuation of this very worthwhile initiative in our performing arts sector. Where is the government’s commitment to the Canberra Pops Orchestra?
Dr Bourke would also have noted the commitment of the Canberra Liberals to the Canberra International Film Festival and the Canberra Short Film Festival. He would also see Canberra’s commitment to the Multicultural Fringe Festival, with an additional $30,000 per year. Finally, had Dr Bourke reviewed the Canberra Liberals’ 2008 arts policy he would have seen a commitment to develop the Canberra Theatre precinct to meet the much growing needs of a major city. The Canberra Liberals have a strong commitment to the arts in Canberra. It is mischievous of Dr Bourke to suggest anything else. That is why I am proposing my second amendment, which I think Dr Bourke has agreed to.
Let me briefly address the other two amendments. The arts contribute to the social, cultural and economic life of Canberra. The statistics are there to show the extent of the contribution and stand to support the argument that the government of the day should have a commitment to the arts. The commitment should not be limited to funding. It should extend to things like audience development, school and community education programs, encouragement of innovation, development of arts tourism through festivals and other events, building of arts infrastructure and a range of other initiatives.
The Loxton report, though it has attracted some criticism, does look at a range of options in these areas. It is important that the government’s response to the report’s
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video