Heritage protections
Ms SANDELL (Melbourne) (14:18): My question is to the Premier. Premier, over the past few years Melbourne has lost many of our iconic cultural venues and buildings; for example, the Palace Theatre, the Princess Mary Club and more. Now we are potentially about to lose two more, with the Nicholas Building in the CBD and the Curtin Hotel in Carlton both up for sale, likely to be turned into apartments. The Nicholas Building is unique in that it houses many artists and creative businesses. The Curtin Hotel is an iconic live music venue and pub. Other organisations, including the council and philanthropists for the Nicholas Building and unions for the Curtin, are willing to contribute significant funds and support to buy these buildings and stop them being turned into apartments, but they will need some state government support to make it happen. Premier, will the state government commit funds to help buy both these iconic heritage buildings?
Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:19): I am very pleased to receive this question from the member for Melbourne. First of all let me make very clear that with the greatest of respect—and I am indebted to the member for Melbourne for conveying messages from the mighty trade union movement—having been down at Trades Hall just last week officially opening, with my honourable friend the Minister for Planning and essentially for heritage as well, the second stage of the redevelopment and the restoration and the historic protection of that symbol of fairness, I am only too well aware of the views of the union movement. Again, with the greatest of respect I do not necessarily need the help of the member for Melbourne to understand what the rest of the labour movement thinks.
The second point I must make surely: if I heard the question correctly, the member for Melbourne is essentially asking me on behalf of the government to commit to the John Curtin Hotel. John Curtin of course was a great Australian Prime Minister. Prior to becoming a great Australian Prime Minister he was of course the state secretary and national president of the timber workers union. It just goes to show: if you stand in one place for long enough, you never know what will pass by. But I tell you what we will not let pass by, and that is the celebration and the protection of our heritage.
In many different ways, over not just the last four or five years but many decades, we have seen many historic buildings—and many of them repurposed actually, and repurposed with the best of intentions and the best of outcomes—fall away because they have not been appropriately maintained, fall away because they have been fundamentally neglected, fall away because they have not been valued. We have got a very different approach, and that is why upon coming to government we made a commitment of a $60 million Living Heritage program—not $6 million, $60 million. That funds over 165 conservation projects, and 100 of those—in fact I think more than 100 of those—are now complete. So we are not just talking about it; we are not running messages where none need to be run. Again, the support for heritage is very, very important. Can I say, again with the greatest of respect, there is a global campaign against appropriation—cultural appropriation, legacy appropriation—and I would suggest that getting up here and pretending that John Curtin might have had anything in common with you and the things you stand for might well be to offend those, I thought, universal principles against such appropriation. Heritage is important, not just in words but in actions and deeds, and we have done it and we will continue to do it.
Ms SANDELL (Melbourne) (14:22): I am not quite sure if that was an attempt to answer the question, but it did not quite answer my question, which was very specifically about two really important buildings in Melbourne that we are about to lose, which the state government can prevent. Looking at the Nicholas Building, if it is sold, which it looks like it is about to be, we will lose an iconic arts and cultural institution that has been with us for 100 years. Nothing else like it exists in the country. The extraordinary economic benefits to Victoria will be lost if these creative sole traders and businesses leave our city. I understand that the City of Melbourne, philanthropists and community organisations are all willing to come to the party in quite a big way if the state government contributes some modest funds to help them purchase the building. Premier, why won’t the state government commit these modest funds to save something so iconic about Melbourne’s cultural life?
Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:23): I thank the member for her supplementary question. Ownership and heritage protection are not the same thing. Who owns the building does not suddenly wash away heritage protections that are either at a council municipal level or at a state significance level. Again, I refute this notion that unless it is owned by certain people it is not protected. That is not right. That is not how heritage works. That is not how heritage has ever worked. And as I just indicated—
Ms Sandell: On a point of order, Speaker, I appreciate the attempt, but on relevance, this question was very much about purchasing the building so that it can continue to maintain its current function quite separate from its heritage value, so I ask that the Premier addresses that point.
The SPEAKER: Order! I understand the question, but the Premier is being relevant to the question.
Mr ANDREWS: If the member is suggesting that we ought go out and literally buy up any building where the landlord might seek a different set of tenants—
A member: And a different use.
Mr ANDREWS: or a different use, all of those things, and somehow that is equivalent in any way to heritage protection, (a) that is wrong, (b) it does not make much sense and (c) it would get pretty expensive pretty fast. I am more than happy to ask the Minister for Planning to sit with the member for Melbourne and talk through these serious issues. They are serious. I thank her for raising them, and hopefully we can work together in a spirit of cooperation.