Issues paper

An issues paper for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts key organisations program Making Solid Ground.

Introduction

This issues paper is part of the 2008 review of the key organisations funding program of the Australia Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts board Making Solid Ground.

The issues listed here will help Indigenous artists and arts organisations input about the issues that matter to them and to future support for Indigenous arts in this country.

This issues paper follows on from the first discussion paper, which provides the framework for the review. A second discussion paper will be available following a national consultation program, summarising these conversations.

Up-to-date information on the review will be posted to:
www.australiacouncil.gov.au/makingsolidground/

Why have a review?

The purpose of the Making Solid Ground review is to make Indigenous arts stronger by making a planned, reasoned investment in Indigenous arts infrastructure which represents:

• cultural integrity
• sound Indigenous business planning
• Indigenous management and control and
• focus on sustainability, strengths and the future.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Arts key organisations program is an infrastructure support program. Infrastructure typically refers to the technical structures that support a society or a sector. We can think of things such as roads,water supply, wastewater, power grids, flood management systems, communications (internet, phone lines, broadcasting), and so forth as infrastructure for the wider society. A more generic definition of infrastructure is the network of assets where the system as a whole is intended to be maintained at a specified standard of service by the continuing replacement and refurbishment of its components.

How to respond to this issues paper

Consultation meetings will be held in each state and territory between 18 August and 18 September. For more information, email makingsolidground@australiacouncil.gov.au

You can also contribute by mail, email or online:

Post: Making Solid Ground
PO Box 788
Strawberry Hills NSW 2012

Email: makingsolidground@australiacouncil.gov.au

Web: www.australiacouncil.gov.au/makingsolidground/

Questions for consideration

What should the review consider?

• What do you think should be the goals and objectives of supporting key Indigenous arts organisations?
• What is your broad assessment of current achievements of Indigenous arts organisations?
• What are the emerging trends, needs, gaps and challenges for key Indigenous arts organisations from your perspective (political, economic, social, environmental and technological)?
• What do you think are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for the Indigenous arts infrastructure?
• What do you think the Australia Council can do to help organisations?
• How can the Australia Council manage the funding program more effectively?

General issues for discussion

• What is most important in sustaining a national Indigenous arts infrastructure?
• How can this funding program best encourage an industry to continue to create, produce and promote?
• What role should this program have in “supporting artistic development”?
• What role should “Increasing earned income (without compromising integrity)” play in this program?
• What are the needs of different types of Indigenous arts organisations? e.g. emerging (1-3 years), developing (4-6 years) and established (7 years and over).
• What are the needs of Indigenous arts organisations that have different operating budgets? e.g. < $200,000, $200,000-$500,000, and >$500,000.
• Do you think funding from this program would help or hinder leveraging other income and support?
• What role should the program play in empowering an Indigenous arts infrastructure to claim, control and enhance Indigenous artists’ and communities’ cultural inheritance?
• What relationship do you see between this program and other funding programs?
• What relationship do you see between the Australia Council and other funding agencies?
• Do you know if there are programs that are available to support your kind of arts activities in your state or territory? Please list as many as you can.

What should be the purpose of this program?

The review is also considering the purpose of the program:

• Should the purpose of the program be to support activities which are the best in the field? OR
• Should the program support activities with the greatest potential? OR
• Should the purpose of the program be to target the highest priority areas of need?

It is clear that one funding program cannot serve all possible purposes so a choice needs to be made.

• Whatever specific activities the program will support, should the Board try to attain a spread of support to all artforms and or all regions?
• If so should the calculation of the spread of resources be for the Board resources alone, the national government alone or the national, state and territory resources in a comprehensive way?
• Should the purpose of the program be those of the Board priorities at the time eg 
  - Indigenous intellectual and cultural property rights
  - Indigenous employment in the arts
  - Indigenous arts international market development
  - Young people
  - Inter-generational – transfer of knowledge from elders to the young people.

Comments from the sector

Many views about what kind of change is most appropriate have been expressed in the consultations to date – from a slight variation of the existing program or a radical new departure.

Here are three individual artsworkers views from the last two weeks:

One artist argues that Indigenous artists need strong platforms, secure spaces to work and that organisations (of different kinds) provide this. She argued that most of ATSIA’s funding should go to art organisations.

Another elder told us he sees the greatest benefit to Indigenous artists would be for the best artists to be supported to tour internationally and earn the respect, profile and income denied them at home/in Australia, on the condition they return and mentor the young upcoming artists with the greatest talent. “Spend over a decade growing the new generation and have the world tell Australia to respect Indigenous culture,” he said.

A third artist, young and eager to work, called for more services to help her succeed on her own terms. “I need accountants, designers, editors, producers and agents that advise and guide me not rip me off. The government money should guarantee me access to copyright advice, to business advice and the best technical skills with proper cultural respect, with savvy, and all to help me succeed”.

Issues

The value chain

A value chain of production and consumption is used in economic theory and modelling. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts board uses a more complete value chain reflecting Indigenous art and culture. Because Indigenous arts and artists operate in an ecosystem the value chain is an important and useful tool for this review. We invite you to look at the value chain of activities on page 7.

Please describe the kinds of infrastructure that exist and are available to you along this chain. e.g. help to develop a marketing plan, become export ready, record etc.

• Where on the value chain spectrum are there gaps in support for Indigenous artists? Is a funding program the best way to deliver services?
• Are there some kinds of activity that need long-term support more than other activities? Almost all artists and arts organisations would want long-term “core” financial support. The more the ATSIA budget supports art this way the less there is for one-off projects, including “first-time” funding.
• Should there be more or less joint planning between national and state and territory agencies? Why? Can you give examples you agree with or want to see in the future?
• Should there be more or less joint funding between national and state and territory agencies? Why? Can you give examples you agree with or want to see in the future?
• Should there be more or less joint communication between national and state and territory agencies? Why? Can you give examples you agree with or want to see in the future?

Continuity and change in the program

On one hand we hear calls for stable long-term funding for some arts organisations and (sometimes) for artists. On the other hand we also hear that those not being funded may be the ones with new or better ideas, and projects.

• What should be the balance? e.g. half the budget each?
• If this was the case and there were 100 Indigenous arts organisations and 20,000 Indigenous artists in Australia, would it be OK if 20 of the organisations and 40 of the artists got a grant in any given year?
• If not, what is a good share? Is it important that funding distribution changes over the years so that an ‘opportunity’ to be funded is opened up from time to time? If so what should be the timeframe?
• Is it important that organisations and/or people who get public funding be expected to share their experience or skills?
• If so what would be a good way to do that?

The program is currently for Indigenous organisations.

• Is this important to you?
• How would you define Indigenous organisation? In terms of percentage owned, percentage managed or in some other way?

The mechanisms of a program

In designing the future program we will need to decide on new eligibility and selection criteria. Eligibility criteria are the rules about who and what can be considered for funding under a program. These determine if an application is seen by and assessed. Assessment criteria are the measures used to assess or judge the merits of a funding proposal. Both kinds of criteria have to be published and only these published criteria are used in making decisions. We invite you to suggest criteria for the new program.

A funding program can receive funding proposals in different ways. Do you support:

• An open public call for funding applications?
• An approach by invitation only?
• A tender approach where tenders are called for a defined service?
• Assessment of proposals with no consideration of past funding history with the Australia Council?

A funding program can be a rolling or ongoing funding relationship or for a set period of time.

• Do you support ongoing funding or set periods of funding?

A funding program can provide a standard fixed level of funding or respond to the amount requested in each funding proposal.

• Do you support a standard fixed level of funding?

Some funding over a multiple number of years can be the same level every year or can be different amounts each year.

• Do you support a funding program providing the same level every year or can be different amounts each year.

15 August 2008