Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Special Minister of State) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of the answer given by Senator Wong in relation to the Australian National Academy of Music. I am very pleased to be co-sponsoring the motion this afternoon with Senator Milne. I also acknowledge the presence in the gallery of some of our fine students from the Australian National Academy of Music. Can I say to them and to those many thousands of people who are appalled at this decision: we will continue to fight this on your behalf and on behalf of those students who are yet to start studying and who should be given the same opportunity.

This matter does not pass the political sniff test. What I want to know and what Senator Milne wants to know is what is actually behind this decision? What has driven this decision? What has driven a decision where there was no consultation, where these fine young people and their teachers were not consulted and were not advised? I will not go through the motion because honourable senators can read that for themselves. But I note that, on 22 October, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts wrote to the chair of ANAM advising of ‘his concern that ANAM may not be the most effective or efficient model for the delivery of national programs supporting elite-level classical music training’. He then went on to say that he had asked his department to investigate alternative options for delivery of this training.

In relation to that letter of 28 October, in which the minister asked his department to investigate those options, will the minister immediately release whatever outcome there was of investigations which indicated that Melbourne university was the most appropriate institution to be taking over this training? I demand that answer, Senator Milne demands that answer and the young people in the gallery demand that answer. Will the minister immediately release that documentation? I suspect that it will be written on the back of a postage stamp, if it is written at all. I suspect it has not been and that there is a reason for this fabrication out of the minister’s office to justify the unjustifiable.

I also note with great interest that, at the end of August, the minister wrote to ANAM requesting that they introduce significant reforms to the way they conduct their training programs. The board wrote back and said that some of these reforms had been implemented and that they were putting together a working party to address the minister’s concerns, which any reasonable organisation would do once requested by the minister. Before they had even started that process the financial rug was pulled out from under the organisation—no excuse, no reason given, no explanation to the board and no explanation to the students as to why ANAM were not given the opportunity to address these matters by the working party, having been requested by the minister to do so. It was not sent down by carrier pigeon, landing six months after the event but by a letter to the board requesting that they do something about it—