As the Murray River - the natural border between New South Wales and Victoria - dries up, it seems that state borders are also breaking down. Well, in arts policy anyway.
Today in Crikey an interesting anonymous tip arrived;
Arts Victoria funding announcement is scheduled to be released this Friday. Several arts organisations that do really good work, highly respected, genuinely tick all the boxes for Australian content, developing young artists, building partnerships, have got the knife. This follows on from some severe bloodletting in the Australia Council funding announcements earlier this year. Some organisations that are rumoured to be defunded this year include Chambermade Opera, Astra, Ballet Lab, Elision (not able to be verified till after Arts Vic announcement).
Lots of disquiet and anger amongst the arts community which is waiting for the government injunction on Friday to lift following the announcement so that they start raising hell. Regarding the Australia Council, a strange Sydney focus and a big conservative lean. In Arts Vic, a sudden-death change in tune to organisations who were given assurances six months ago that all was well and now have had the plug pulled with no wind-down plan or valid explanation of why evaluations have changed. Several orgs are likely to fold, and others have dramatic staff, admin and programming cuts to face up to. A real kick in the guts to Australian culture and a worryingly cavalier attitude to sustainable art-making from the arts bodies.
There's three points to this argument that get lost amongst the general howling that goes on whenever there is some major funding changes.
Firstly, when is the arts industry going to learn to lobby governments as a united front? This constant justification for funding cloaked in terms of educational/community/social benefits instead of pushing the old fashioned we are here and we need to be funded line is extraordinarily divisive. This is not to mention the amount of back-stabbing that goes on behind closed doors whenever an organisation gets the ear of a Minister - 'they get lots of money, why don't we get some of that' type of tactic.
We must be the only industry in the country that lobbies the government like this and other industries representing anything from mining to banking to education wouldn't be caught dead playing those types of tactics.
Secondly, eventually there needs to be some clearing away of the deadwood so that emerging artists, practitioners and organisations get a turn at the funding pie (not that all the above companies are deadwood). But there needs to be a reality check from many organisations that maybe their time is up. Often a group will get funding for say ten years and what they were proposing back in 1998 hasn't really changed a decade later. And it's a funding pie that everyone seems to take for granted. I have seen on industry bulletin boards straight up whinging and moaning when a company does get funding that it is a) not enough b) too little too late or c) not the right type of funding.
And finally, surely it must be time to examine the rift that exists between the major performing arts companies (AMPAG) and the rest of the industry. This shouldn't just be couched in financial terms but also within the creative. Partnerships need to be established far more often that what they are and they must be across all platforms.
It really shouldn't be a surprise when the Australia Council, Arts NSW or Arts Victoria shake things up a bit. Shouldn't we be innovative enough to keep a bit ahead of the game?
7 comments:
I don't know how the Victorian funding model operates, but I have heard good things of a couple of the mentioned organisations and so they don't all seem to fit the deadwood model you propose...yes the arts industry is yet to find the right way to argue their case politically, but the difference between it and other industries is that it doesn't and will never realistically fit the profit-based model. Widget makers wouldn't make widgets just because they looked beautiful or to make a statement, yet artists create art for little or no recompense and our culture would be the poorer without them. Red Stitch was in the press recently for deservedly getting some government funding, but that's after years of the actors basically not getting paid. If there are organisations that have a record of strong programs, audience support, demonstrating educational / community / social benefits and diverse funding sources- ie they actually have managed to make the books balance for more than one year in the row - should there really be no recognition of that?
Wow. Following that one up. If it's true, it's a scandalously bad decision.
Ballet Lab is a YOUNG (and exciting) company, so scarcely counts as dead wood.
I should just clarify that I am aware that not all those companies on the list are deadwood. I am merely drawing attention to the other side of the funding debate.
Checked it out with Chamber Made. Their state funding has actually been increased. Also, I'm not sure if Elision actually get money from Arts Victoria...and would be astonished if they cut Ballet Lab. I think that one can probably go to sleep.
The Oz Council is of course a different story. Seems to me this person has got mixed up with his/her funding bodies.
Thanks Alison - That's the thing about the tips and rumours section of Crikey ... not to mention some of their articles ... is they can often be a load of rubbish.
And I am glad that Chamber Made got an increase.
Alison - that's great news about Chamber Made, they're not listed on the latest Australic Council funding - did they get that as well?
CMO are funded by the Music Board, not the Theatre Board. And yes, they lost their OzCouncil triennial funding.
Post a Comment