Mr BAIRD (10:15 AM) —I rise today to support the National Gallery Amendment Bill 2002, which proposes a minor amendment to the National Gallery Act 1975. Currently, section 9 of the act sets out the process by which works of art can be disposed of from the national collection. Subsection 9(4) stipulates:

The proposed amendment will remove the words `gift or' from subsection 9(4). The effect of the bill will be to allow the National Gallery to gift works of art where they are unfit for or no longer required by the National Gallery.

It is interesting that the member for Braddon, who provided us with some details in his speech, spent most of it in relation to the proposed review of this portfolio and the galleries. It was all on what could be called hypotheticals. He had no actual basis on which to make this broad sweeping attack on the government, rather it was: it could be this, it could be that, it could be something else. It filled in his speech, but there was no substance in what was actually said. It was a good try. I am sure it keeps the branches amused in Braddon, but in terms of a basis for his accusations it was very thin pickings and very hypothetical. Anyway, I am sure that it will keep the member for Braddon amused, and we look forward to the announcement when the review is completed.

Basically, this is a technical review. It takes out some minor wording in relation to the disposal of works of art. They were previously prevented from disposing of works of art unless they had no commercial value, nor could they give a work of art as a gift unless it was valueless. This removes the gift provision so that, even though the work of art has some value, if it meets certain criteria—such as there being other copies of it or it is not seen as fitting in with the overall collection in the gallery—it can be gifted to some of the national regional galleries. It seems like a sensible proposal, and I am glad to see the shadow parliamentary secretary is supporting this proposal. It would have been nice if we had had a speech which congratulated the minister on this proposal and these initiatives making it possible for regional galleries to be given these works of art. These changes will be useful and important. The fact is, a number of such works are currently being held on long-term loan by regional galleries around Australia, so the financial impact from the amendment is expected to be minimal as works of significant value are not likely to be disposed of from the national collection.

The government is committed to the regions and this has been evident through the arts. The idea has been to take art to the regions to allow people the opportunity to see works they would not ordinarily be able to see. Of course, my colleague the member for Hinkler would be able to appreciate that in his own area and would know that now there is a great opportunity for regional galleries—

Mr Neville —The Bundaberg Regional Arts Centre.

Mr BAIRD —Yes, the Bundaberg Regional Arts Centre. It is not only the arts community that benefits—tourists will also be able to see the works of art. I am sure that the member for Hinkler, an outstanding member, welcomes these proposals to assist regional Australia through the provision of these works of art.

The National Gallery of Australia has over the past few years extended the program of loans of works of art to other galleries and through touring exhibitions. During 2001-02 the gallery loaned more than 2,000 works for exhibition, substantially enhancing the significance of regional galleries. In October 2002, the gallery announced it would be sending some of its most treasured works to 20 galleries around the country over the following 12 months as part of its celebration of its 20th anniversary. This was done in consultation with the directors of 20 state and regional galleries, who were able to nominate their top three works from a list of 20 possibilities. It is a good initiative and I am sure that the members for Clarence and Hinkler would appreciate and support these changes.

In addition to this initiative, the government has initiated several other programs to assist arts in the regions. One of these is the Visions of Australia program, which aims to make exhibitions of cultural material accessible to more Australians. It does this by providing grants to cultural and community organisations to develop and tour exhibitions of historical and scientific material, visual arts and crafts, multimedia and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture throughout Australia. The Regional Arts Fund is a further federal government initiative that supports the arts in regional and rural Australia.

The government takes very seriously the issue of the arts in the regions. This is in stark contrast to Labor, which ignored artists and audiences in rural and regional Australia whilst in government and, really, nothing has changed while they have been in opposition. The member for Hinkler, who is a former state secretary of the Arts Council of Australia, would know that it is this government which has done much more for rural and regional Australia. When the former government were in power there were some eight arts ministers. They were rotated at a great rate through the portfolio. It would appear that nobody wanted it. It was held for a while and then there would be a change. Since they have been in opposition—and long may they stay there—they have had no fewer than six shadow arts spokespeople. They have downgraded the portfolio—no offence to my colleague—and have given it to a shadow parliamentary secretary. That is how it is being regarded; it is not being given any serious consideration.

I was very pleased to see that the government committed $1 million to a regional art gallery in my electorate. The total cost of the gallery, completed in 2000, was some $7 million, with $6 million coming from the council and $1 million provided by the government out of funding from the Federation Fund. The Hazelhurst Regional Gallery and Arts Centre have provided me with figures showing that they have had more than 127,000 people through the doors since opening almost three years ago. They have held significant exhibitions at the gallery, including the Archibald Prize exhibition in 2002, the Tony Tuckson exhibition, which was on loan from the National Gallery of Australia, and the Imants Tillers exhibition in 2002. It is a very popular institution. People in the Sutherland shire have warmly received the Hazelhurst Regional Gallery and Arts Centre. It is always full of people at the various exhibitions and is one of the great initiatives of this government.

This bill will enhance the collections of regional galleries with very little impact on the national collection. The benefits will flow on to the communities who will have better access to a wider range of works of art. It is an important initiative that will continue the government's commitment to rural and regional Australia through the arts.

We have a very fine national art gallery and its collection of works is of world standard. Governments of both political persuasions have been committed to this gallery. The gallery has fine works of art which are seen not only by Australians but by international visitors as well. International visitors to Australia regularly visit the gallery, acquainting themselves with Australia's cultural development and history. The range of works is outstanding.

The gallery is attempting, with its wide range of works, to provide opportunities to regional Australia. This government is committed to regional and rural Australia and the many regional art galleries we have throughout the country. It is important that we have top quality art works in our National Gallery and that, where they are redundant to the requirements of the National Gallery, they are provided to the regional galleries. It is important that we continue to provide assistance to regional Australia by ensuring that works which are surplus to the needs of the National Gallery are provided to the regional galleries. I am pleased to have been able to speak at extended length on this bill. I commend the bill to the House.