COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
SPEECH
The Rt Hona. W. McMAHON, M. P.
Prime Minister
ON
National Film and Television Training School
,[ From the ' Parliamentary Debates', 26 October 1971]
Mr McMAHON ( Lowe-Prime Minister)
On 14th October, in reply to a question
from the Leader of the Opposition, 1
undertook to look at figures concerning the
proposals of the Interim Council for a
National Film and Television Training
School that my colleague, the Minister for
the Environment, Aborigines and the Arts
( Mr Howson) had presented to the House
and at criticisms that had been made about
them. I have had the matter looked into
and I have studied the various statements
' hat have been made in the House. I am
satisfied that the Minister did not give to the
House-to quote the Leader of the Opposition-'-
figures which were not accurate or
estimates which were misleading'. rme
discussion that has taken place in the House
' ias centred around the cost of acquiring
land and whether an area of 60 acres, or an
area of 8 acres, should be acquired.
In November 1969, the Government set
up an Interim Council for a National Film
and Television Training School. The Interim
Council submitted its first report in
November 1970. 1 table a -copy of the
report. In paragraph 11.4 the Council
expressed the view that: ' It is not a viable
proposition to set up a National Film and
Television School on its own, with a student
body of only limited numbers'. In paragraph
11.8 the Council said that: ' The
school should be established as an independent
College of Advanced Education
immediately adjacent to an existing educational
institution'. In paragraph 12.3 the
Council suggested that an area of some 60
acres might well be required. The full import will be apparent to members on
reading the text of these paragraphs of the
report. The Interim Council submitted a second
report in March this year. I table a copy of
that report. In it the Council put forward a
programme of action on the basis that the
National Film and Television School would
open up for some pupils early in 1973. In
paragraph 4 of the report the Council
suggested a timetable and said that-and I
quote from sub-paragraph 5-the programme
as set out in the timetable is
applicable whether the Government accepts
the recommendation to purchase the larger
area required for a Centre or a lesser area
sufficient for the Film and Television School
alone'. Mr Acting Speaker, it is clear that
the Council was to be taken in its second
report as adhering to its recommendation
in the first report that an area of something
like 60 acres should be acquired, although
it was recognising that the Government, on
its initiative, might only authorise the
acquisition of a lesser area.
In June this year the Minister raised with
the Council the question whether the School
might not progress along rather more
cautious lines than the Council had proposed.
On 30th June the Minister received
estimates which I now table. It will be seen
from an examination of these estimates that
on the basis of the acquisition of 60 acres,
which was the Council's recommendation,
the cost would be S7.6m, and that on the
basis of the acquisition of 8 acres the cost
would be $ 5.6m. I table a copy of a letter
dated 28th July 1971, addressed to the
Minister by the Chairman of the Interim
Council. It reads:
At the meeting of the Interim Council on Tuesday,
27th July, it was decided that I should
confirm, in writing, two of the points made in our
personal discussions, as being the firm views of the
Interim Council.
Whilst fully recognising the present need for
economies, the Council stresses that it would be
self-defeating to begin the school inadequately.
Although it would be possible to move more
slowly than envisaged in the original reports, the
Council considers the the school must start off
with adequate resources at each stage if it is
to be developed in a worthwhile way.
The Council also is anxious to make perfectly
clear that its recommendation on the purchase of
the land, now available in a non-intensive subdivision,
is based on the belief that the site should
not be confined to the area needed solely for a
Film and Television School. Other schools in
associated studies are under active consideration,
and their eventual close association and physical
location alongside the Film School is considered
of great importance to its long-term success.
The opportunity to acquire the full site so
advantageously will never reoccur.
I realise I have already made these points in
personal discussions with you, but ' I agree with
the Council that it is desirable that they bz
confirmed in writing.
On 8th September the Minister mae a
statement in the House in the course of
which he said:
Whilst the Council's enthusiasm for this project
is fully apparent from its reports, the continuing
economic stringencies and the substantial cost
which is estimated to be over $ 7m during the
next 5 years have led to consideration of its
proposals being deferred for 12 months. The
proposals may then be considered in the light
of what I hope will be more propitious economic
circumstances. Having regard to the very recent and, I
might add, firm advice that the Minister
had received in Mr Coleman's letter
of 28th July, the Minister was justified in
treating the Council's proposals as being
proposals involving the expenditure of
over $ 7m during the next 5 years.
There remains one matter, namely, the
matter of the number of graduates, to
which -the Minister referred in answer to
a question by the Leader of the Opposition
on 10th September. The Minister
gave a figure of 12 graduates. The report
to the Interim Council by P. A. Management
Consultants Pty Ltd reflected some
doubt about the needs of industry for
graduates. The report said: ' Under the assumption that present trends
will continue, the number of graduates from the
School that the industry believes it could abso,:
has been determined in the range from 30-4
graduates.' However, on the same page the survey
went on to conclude that the School
should cater for an initial output of only
15 graduates a year for the industry. The
Minister acknowledges that he was in error
in referring to 12 graduates. The figure
should have been 15. I table a copy of the
consultants' report.
Mr Acting Speaker, I have stated the
position in some detail, and I have tabled
reports and other papers, so that the
whole matter can be looked at fairly and
squarely. I have done so myself and air
fully satisfied with the account that the
Minister has given to the House. It is true
that consideration had been given by the
Minister to the possibility of proceeding
with the School by itself in an area of 8
acres. But that was not the Council's proposal.
The Council had recommended the
acquisition of 60 acres and on 28th July
it affirmed that recommendation. The
making of a decision was a matter for
the Government. The advice of the
Council was not, however, lightly to be
disregarded. In all the circumstances, and
in view of the economic factors to which
the Minister referred in his statement of
8th September, the Government concluded
that it should look at -the whole
question again within the next year. This
the Government has undertaken to do and
this it will do. I present the following
papers: National Film and Television Training School
Interim Council
First Report of November 1970,
Second Report of March 1971,
Tables of Estimates of Costs of Establish
ing the School,
A Survey of Employment Opportunities
for Graduates of the Training Schoo:.
A copy of a letter dated 28th July ' 197.1
from the Chairman to the Minister f" r
the Environment, Aboriginies and the
Arts,
Answers by the Prime Minister to a
question by the Leader of the Opposition
on 14th October concerning the
proposals of the Interim Council for a
National Film and Television Training
School, 26th October 1971.
19997/ 71W. G. MuRmAY, Government Printer, Canberra