ADELAIDE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA\TOC\2\ADELAIDE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA

 

 

\IND\Speech:nn:The Hon. SANDRA KANCK    The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: I move:

     That the Legislative Council—

     1.  recognises the extremely high standards of performance of the Adelaide Symphony Orchestra; and

     2.  expresses concern at the threat to that orchestra's long-term financial viability and survival as a symphony orchestra.

 

524The release of the Strong report into Australia's symphony orchestras brought the worst news to South Australia: the recommendation that the Adelaide Symphony Orchestra (ASO) should have its numbers reduced from 75 to 56 full-time equivalents. What irked so many South Australians was that the Sydney Symphony Orchestra has remained unscathed in the process. Members of the ASO swung swiftly into action, emailing members of parliament, and I think the very next day a trio of ASO performers plus a chair on which was positioned a musical instru­ment—together purporting to be a quartet—performed in Rundle Mall to show the impact of a 25 per cent cut in orchestra numbers—gaining national media attention in the process.

     The call went out for the four South Australian members of federal cabinet to get in there and represent South Australians—and it must have worked because arts minister Kemp got a very clear message from cabinet that these cuts were unacceptable. However, the federal government's response to the lobbying remains unacceptable to the Australian Democrats—and I hope every other member of this chamber. Minister Kemp's so-called solution has been basically to handball it to the state government.

     The terms of reference given to Strong probably gave him little alternative, but the outcomes certainly demonstrate that when it comes to arts funding so many of those in control of the purse strings seem to think that Australia stops at the Blue Mountains; and it still leaves the ASO's musicians hanging, with no certainty for the future. Let us look at what the Sydney-centric method of funding delivers. Sydney gets $26 million worth of annual funding while Adelaide gets $9 million. The consequence of that is the entry salary for a musician in the ASO is $39 000 per annum, and for section leaders it is $61 000. This compares with the entry salary of $65 000 for the Sydney Symphony Orchestra.

     I went to the ASO's gala concert in March and I was absolutely wowed by the solo violin work of Margaret Blades, when she played Ravel's Tzigane. It is an extraordi­narily complex work—and I am not even a huge fan of the violin. Yet, as I sat there and admired so much what she was doing, I wondered why it would be worth her while to even hang around with the ASO, because she has no certainty that the orchestra with which she is playing will be the same one in 12 months. It could very much be a minor symphony orchestra.

     The skewed funding to our orchestra sees the Tasmanian Symphony Orchestra as a double wind orchestra; our ASO as a triple wind orchestra; and—wait for it—Sydney as a quintuple wind orchestra. Yet, despite the disadvantage the funding arrangements bring to the ASO, we know that it continues to prove itself to be a world-class orchestra. So far this year, I have been to three performances of the ASO, and, of course, like many others I took in Wagner's Ring in November and December last year. I have to say that I went to hear the orchestra, rather than to listen to the singers. I purchased a seat right in the very front row so that I could see the orchestra in the pit and see the conductor. I could not see the surtitles, but I could not have cared less because, from where I sat, I was right above the sound of those glorious Wagnerian tubas, contra-bass trombones and French horn choirs.

     It was a glorious sound, which received accolades from around the world—deservedly so. There is no doubt that, despite the funding restrictions, the ASO punches above its weight, and the performances of the Ring are proof of that. But drop down its numbers as is proposed and Wagner will be out of the question; so, too, will be Bruckner, Brahms and Berlioz. It will be an orchestra that will have to revert to the playing of Mozart and Bach. While I have no truck against Bach, the performance I saw last Friday night of Beethoven's 9th would also be out of the question. I note the Hon. Carmel Zollo was also at that performance, and I am sure she would think that would be a tremendous kick in the guts for South Australia.

     The Hon. R.D. Lawson interjecting:

     The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: I have to acknowledge that their bite is definitely better than their bark. The argu­ment that the Strong report would advocate is that the orchestras could be enlarged from time to time with casuals. Mr Strong might think that, but the reality is that those casuals would not be around in Adelaide for the ASO to call in. Why would they be? They would have moved on to Sydney or Melbourne where they would have far more certainty of a job in an orchestra and at a higher rate of pay than they could get in Adelaide. The Chairman of the Wiener Philharmoniker, Dr Clemens Hellsberg—who is also a player in that orchestra—has written a general letter of concern in support of the Adelaide Symphony Orchestra. The letter states:

     . . . the most important thing is to recognise that the cutting or downsizing of ensembles is extremely problematic and stressful for the remaining players. As an experienced official, I am able to say that such action is, in fact, suicidal. . . I doubt that it is necessary to mention the overwhelming repercussions of being a world renowned cultural city without having a symphonic ensemble.

Unfortunately, we have to mention that because it seems to have escaped the knowledge or understanding of our decision makers on the east coast.

     The Hon. T.G. Cameron interjecting:

     The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: Or ignored, yes. Surely, the federal government should learn from the example of the Queensland Symphony Orchestra where insufficient funding led to low morale, which led to poor quality performance, which resulted in diminishing audience numbers, which led to reduced revenue, which, in turn, led to reduced funding.

     I received a letter from one of the members of the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra who previously played with the Adelaide Symphony Orchestra. Simon Collins wrote:

     The two most important priorities for performing arts companies must be performance standard and accessibility for all Australians—

please note, Mr Kemp—

Hence, savaging the single most important asset of these orches­tras—the musicians—will do nothing to ensure their long-term vibrancy and sustainability.

525The mentality of the arts funding providers is to tell the South Australian government to put in more funding; and, while more money from the South Australian government would most certainly be welcome, the South Australian government, I acknowledge, is already a significant contribu­tor to the ASO, and its contributions proportionately out­weigh the contributions of other state governments in support of their local orchestras. I bet that the Sydney Symphony Orchestra does not have to go cap in hand to the New South Wales government and ask for money.

     However, I ask: why should a child growing up in South Australia not have the experience of hearing a full symphony orchestra as I did at 11 years of age? That experience transformed my experience of music. Why should a child growing up in Sydney have what then becomes a privilege for a few? Imagine if the federal government commissioned a report on the Art Gallery of South Australia and demanded that a quarter of its paintings be taken down, because that is effectively what has happened to the ASO. Imagine if it had commissioned a report on the State Library and demanded that it reduce its books by 25 per cent, because that is effectively what has happened to the ASO.

     There would be an outcry. It would be an outrage. On 18 March this year, as a guest columnist in The Advertiser, Greg Barns, a councillor for the Sydney Symphony Orchestra (at least he had the honesty to say so), had the temerity to tell South Australians how to get it right with our orchestra. It might have helped him a little if he had done his research. He told readers of boring programming of symphony orchestras around the world. Check out the ASO's programming then, Greg. Versatility has become a hallmark, with the recent Bugs Bunny and Lalo Schifrin concerts. I must say that I am very much looking forward to going to the Led Zeppelin concert coming up in June.

     Promote our chief conductor, he says—easily done if you have the Sydney Symphony Orchestra budget behind you. Sydney has a budget of $3.9 million just for visiting conduc­tors, and that amount exceeds the accumulated debt of the ASO. With that sort of budget, the Sydney Symphony Orchestra can fly in an international conductor for a week, put him up at the best hotel in Sydney and fly him out again. South Australians can only drool at that prospect. Barns suggested following the London Symphony Orchestra's example of dropping admission prices to its concerts. Good idea, Greg, but it does not factor in the cost subsidy it gets from playing for operas. By contrast, when the ASO per­formed for the Ring last year, it got the princely payment of $350 000 from the state opera for 12 weeks' work. Effective­ly, the ASO became one of the principal sponsors of the Ring.

     The Hon. T.G. Cameron interjecting:

     The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: Effectively, that $350 000 was a subsidy. As a supporter, I received a letter from 5MBS-FM last week in which it described the recommendations of the Strong report as `Eastern states triumphalism'. Surely, it must be, because, at the same time as minister Kemp is threatening the future of the ASO because of an apparent lack of funds, our Prime Minister has talked of budget surpluses and more tax cuts. Now, you and I pay taxes for the things that we cannot do on our own.

     If I want to hear serious, expertly played music I cannot afford to hire a full symphony orchestra, and neither can you. But if enough people pool their money together (and that is what we do when we pay our taxes), then together we can have a symphony orchestra play for us. The Strong report is a wake-up call to the federal government that treating orchestras as corporate entities was always the wrong way to go. Orchestras are not primarily money making profit or loss businesses. We do not ask for public transport to make a profit. The environmental, economic and social benefits that arise from having fewer cars on our roads accrue to the whole of society—similarly with orchestras.

     The benefits that they provide to the culture and soul of a city far outweigh the costs. The first sticker that has gone on my relatively new car is an ASO one, and it says, `Great cities have great orchestras'. Previously, I mentioned the letter I received from Simon Collins. His letter states:

     I grew up in Adelaide and trained there as a musician. I was taught and mentored by members of the Adelaide Symphony Orchestra for 14 years before winning an audition into the Mel­bourne Symphony where I am currently engaged. Professional symphony orchestras provide the nucleus for musical activity in a city. The ASO fed my first aspirations to become a musician and for those 14 years provided the opportunity to access the first-class training I needed to fulfil that dream.

The South Australian Democrats look forward to support for this motion from all members of this chamber. We must all commit to ensuring that our Adelaide Symphony Orchestra is able to continue as a fully constituted orchestra, and not just a glorified chamber orchestra.

One White

     The Hon. A.J. REDFORD secured the adjournment of the debate.