Page 1895 - Week 06 - Thursday, 5 June 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
• Several factually incorrect and irrelevant statements referring to me personally and the management of my event, its history and my appointment were made. Amongst the many are:
Ms Jones (MLA): “One member of the Canberra arts scene said his work is usually base, unsophisticated and embarrassing.” There was no reference to any individual here and is a value judgment. If I am to be “named and shamed” by the Assembly - embarrassed, defamed and made fun of in public; in parliament - by the members - why are unattributed judgments like this allowed to be referenced?
Ms Jones: “A fringe festival is meant to be related to the main event; some would even say that it should complement the main event. Fringe festivals were born out of the experience of the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, which was an opportunity for those who could not be on the main stage to perform in a low-cost environment. It should be a chance for others who cannot be a Timomatic on the main stage to get a gig and show their talent. The performances, if they are to be directed and carefully selected, should have a narrative that complements the main event.”
This is not fact. If members have no competence in arts practice and are not aware of how an event like this fits into a cultural or historical landscape, how can any of their assessments of the event be taken seriously. By making incorrect statements about the event, its history and how it should be run on the public record, a person who reads this as fact could therefore mistakenly assume I have not done my job properly, thus adversely affecting my reputation. Members should not make comment on cultural areas they have not been correctly briefed on.
• Mr Hanson (MLA) referred to the following statement by the head of multicultural forum. ”...(*the event) insulted quite a few people along the way, definitely the German community and of course our friends in the Jewish community, it is just simply unacceptable.” The person who made this statement was not at the event. I have spoken with senior representatives of each of the communities referred to, and they had no complaint to make to me. This statement is untrue. This statement adversely affects my reputation amongst this community and should not remain unchallenged on the public record.
• It has been referred to by members, and therefore has damaged me personally and professionally, that my arts practice is offensive and has racially vilified others and that somehow I need to be “overseen” - something no other artist in the ACT is subjected to. I refer to Mr Shane Rattenbury’s statement who demonstrates clearly the odds at which the ACT Liberal Opposition in the references to me and my practice are with their federal counterparts.
Mr Rattenbury: “The relevant part of the Racial Discrimination Act which Mr Wilson and the Liberals have vowed to repeal is section 18C. It says it is
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video