What do you think should be priorities for a national cultural policy?

Realistic support for visual art practice in local communities.

Let's shake off decades of government neglect and get on a par with support being given in European countries, where governments understand the immense value that results from sustaining and encouraging active art practice.

I take issue with the minister's 3rd stated theme for consideration; "Powering the young."

I am young. The young should be powered. Should the middle aged or elderly NOT be powered?

I think it is dangerous to the collective cultural development to single out a group for attention or benefit based on age.

If I was running an arts portfolio I would make funding for touring artists conditional on conducting "master classes". So when someone like Kate Blanchett tours to Tasmania, she conducts a class. An emphasis on "skills transferance", and opening up channels for aspiration. So as a touring artist part of your responsibility should be to leave a little bit of yourselves here, by way of class? Art , education, culture.

Here's a few, possibly already mentioned, but here goes:

1: Reduction or abolition of HECS for students undertaking visual arts studies that qualify for Honours level study (or above) and pass degree. (NSW Government removed HECS from one BFA program in their portfolio responsibilities). An artist pays almost all of their income in the early years on living and work expenses. Many will never be able to pay off their HECS debts which continue indexing for life.

2: Set up decent tax concessions or offsets for businesses that support professional arts sponsorship, residencies, prizes, grants, art-built-in style projects (see Qld Govt.), or projects like Renew Newcastle where unused commercial space is provided to artists running a professional studio or business for minimal or no rent in return for in-kind services.

3: Govt. supported Residencies and art projects could be useful for rural farmers, business owners, and smaller communities facing economic crisis etc.

4: ArtStart is a great initiative as it does not discriminate on age and addresses the under-supported area of emergent practice. One issue with some existing emergent initiatives is that artists succeeding are already represented by galleries and have had commercial success. If the criteria is emergent, then it needs to be applied fairly and include those developing their work to attract industry attention.

5: More support for ARI's: including workshops on how to set-up that deal with fundamentals of running an art business. Many artists are trying to make work and run such projects and can fail from lack of support or fundamental business skills. ARI's are crucial for artists who function outside of commercial or public gallery spaces, or who are not represented by galleries. Tax breaks for businesses offering commercial space to ARI's would also be good, as increased rents are often the fatal blow to such projects. ABaF does such workshops and seminars. A mentorship system would also be useful.

6: Introduction of resale royalty act should be a fundamental part of this policy. Would Midnight Oil have survived without royalties? I think not. Artists live on nothing, spending everything to make work. They then lose 40% to 50% commission to a gallerist if represented. Tax and gst deducted. This is seen as the status-quo and part of the artist life. Why should an artist exist in poverty and wear all of the costs and none of the profit? An artist making an work may sell that for $1000 or under. Ten years later, resold on auction, it may fetch anywhere between $10k to $130k depending on the artist. Why should an artist, who produced that work, not be entitled to a 5% resale royalty?

7. ABC funding needs to be retained for arts programming- particularly Sunday Arts. The ABC could present an excellent marketing arena for artists, curators and galleries (public or not) who are putting on shows with limited budgets. This year I tried (unsuccessfully) to have S.A visit our curated show on emergent practice in Qld. The show was pulled from air for around 4-6 weeks??? which may explain this, or simply that their budget didn't allow for anything other than bigger public gallery exhibits to be covered. Coverage of the arts is critical for artists in all stages of their careers, especially those building entire projects within community spaces, and reliant mainly on in-kind support. The ABC is one of the last arenas left for arts related broadcasting. It is not commercially attractive to networks, like sport or 'reality TV' shows- maybe there could be incentives there for the government to introduce?

I'm not an expert on these issues, but these are the observations I can make as an artist facing the difficulties involved with studying (now a necessary road to 'professional' status), making experimental work, accessing funding and engaging with the wider artistic and public community. Businesses who support the arts should be given incentives that allow them to invest in projects outside of their core business areas.

3 priorities for a national cultural policy:

1. Remove any focus in funding on work that is Australian in nature. This auto-enforces stereotypes and limits creativity. Australia will evolve in time, and our creative people will lead us there, wherever 'there' is.

2. Stop trying to officially define artforms. Funding for the arts should be funding for the arts, based on creativity and public interest. It's crazy to put a certain amount aside for Opera when people pushing the boundaries suffer from being hard to define.

3. Artistic education needs a rethink in line with point 2. The arts are unique in that they need extreme specialists (with talent and a little bit of vision) and extreme generalists (with vision and a little bit of talent). Thus we need two distinct forms of education. Trying to train people to be both (Melbourne Model, I'm looking at you) will result in too many of them ending up as neither.

Perhaps we can broaden the first theme in the speech; "Keeping culture strong."

To me, this seems to suggest firstly that we should maintain some sort of status quo - it claims a strength of culture which should be maintained, where in my opinion we should be looking towards the untapped resources rather than the established culture. Of course I am not suggesting we should reduce our current efforts in established areas, but I'm not sure that should be priority #1

In saying this I think I am supporting the first 2 excellent points in houyhnhm's comment.

1. A well resourced and workable system to support projects initiated by individual artists. Less funding focus on mainstream heritage arts organisations preserving European culture. This is not where the future of Australian arts culture lies. This will require the vision and courage to stand up to influential lobbyists. It will also require realistic resources to address the current imbalance. We must try to create an environment where artists can earn at least a part-time living wage. This will not be achieved by giving the major orgs more money and assuming that a 'trickle down' effect follow. Major orgs do not, on the whole, employ significant numbers of creators.

2. A well designed, forward thinking national arts curriculum in Australian schools. The focus needs to be shifted away from heritage 'classical' forms toward more relevant contemporary work (emerging trends even???). This is especially the case in the music curriculum area.

3. The creation of a new centre for excellence that addresses and supports talent in the contemporary music area. It is a shame the ANAM review did not explore this issue. Why is all of the centre of excellence support directed to 2% of the art form? If such an approach were adopted in film, it would be a joke. Let's be brave, be relevant and embrace contemporary Australian culture.

4. A review of the status of the arts in the university sector. The government may be aware that the arts have suffered huge set backs in the university sector and a number of courses have been shut or downsized. A review is needed of the discipline-band funding mechanism to support undergraduate student places in arts disciplines. Starting here will have a dramatic effect on this sector and it is a simple process to invoke.

i would like to see a Policy on investment in Arts Infrastructure-if we want a vibrant and creative community then we must have Infrastructure to support it.

I believe strongly in the private/public sector partnership model but this requires a formal policty too on where the government will match funding

The premise in this question is that 'national' is separate from 'international'. But for a vibrant national culture, it is important that we are engaged closely with what's happening overseas. That doesn't mean we copy other trends, but it helps us put our own work in perspective, even appreciate it more.

There has been a serious decline in support for International exchange through the Australia Council. While millions are still spent on an elite event such as the Venice Biennale, very modest programs to support craft and design overseas have been scrapped. Where do our finest makers get support for showing their work in fairs, expos and exhibitions overseas? Are we destined to be forever an import culture?

This is a priority that needs to be seriously address in a future 'national' cultural policy.

Critically for me and reflective of a long tradition in the European Union is the stimulation, encouragement and enhancement of building partnerships across boarders to support mutual benefit of countries.

The one tradition which Europe has managed to get right -- after WW2 is to support and encourage mutual understanding, respect and education of respective culture.

In light of this, I would like to see the federal government seek to introduce under the APEC structure a collaborative cultural cluster centre. This would include research in the arts for the whole region.

What will this do? It will stimulate, support mutual collaborative funding between countries where projects are implemented in the mutual countries for both their benefit.

For example. Film Co productions between APEC countries. This mirrors similar activity under the EU banner where EU countries are enabled in their efforts to develop film co productions. This would be a fantastic starting point as a model is already in existence. All that would need to be done is to fit that model into the APEC structure and seek mutual agreement of a first step research arm to facilitate opportunities for artists in the APEC region.

The support of collaborative cultural ties and mutual accountability for projects with support between countries to tell mutually beneficial stories is, I believe an important need to address to enhance our LOCAL business and CULTURAL outcomes.

In order to keep 'kulture' dynamic,there needs to be more chances to come together at the local neighbourhood level.More funding possibilities for "neighbourhood" cutural expressions.Keep the bottom of the pot on the boil and the artist of the future will be able to swim for the surface.How can you get your confidence and skills without the nurturing and encouragement of opportunities at the beginning? Access to education is another necessary step.Then of course comes forums to mix with other practitioners.Chances for professional development in regions as well as the big city centres.Two way interaction will always prove positive.

Then when artistic works from all disciplines attract innovation funding,there should be follow up opportunities to "develop" the works further.Many an artist loses heart and can 'drop out" because of the cost of keeping on keeping on.

Cultural policy, at both Commonwealth and State levels, has focused too much on the consumers of culture (audiences) while neglecting the producers of culture (the artists). I think we need to strike a fairer balance between audience development and artistic development (at both individual and institutional levels). Many of our public galleries and performing arts venues are so driven by the need to sell tickets for every show, that they have little opportunity to program new and challenging work.

Sydney, according to architect Philip Cox “lacks attractive urban spaces”. Spaces that can inspire us or at least that give way to artists to re-invent and imagine in a different light. Independent art practice is virtually impossible in Sydney today. Right now, this sector is facing an unprecedented crisis. Not only from diminishing State government funding, but also severe rent hikes leading to an exodus of artists from the city. This is compounded by the over protective and prohibitive conditions that make working in the City financially unviable. The strangulating risk averse culture in Sydney is due to the growing shadow of public liability insurance issues and overly zealous OHAS practices that do not make for safer work places but for dead spaces, devoid of artists and people in general, rendering cities banal and devoid of life.

This distinct lack of imagination and creativity in Sydney is due to State Government back sliding on arts agendas, its’ pandering to developers and its’ distinct lack of vision. Why can’t we provide Sydney and its children vibrant cultural experiences and opportunities to build a new 21st century arts industry, get skills to participate, gets jobs in the arts and be competitive on the world stage?

Perhaps empower the artist, instead of business models for artists, lets create arts models for business and government. Maybe then we might have a society that has a more ethical aesthetic value rather than no values at all except the bottom line.

I think that the following should be priorities for national cultural policy:

1. Attract entrepreneurs to the subsidised arts sector, eg digital distribution entrepreneurs. Incentives could include tax rebates or attractive conditions for doing business. This is necessary for the subsidised cultural sector to capitalise on commercial opportunities, such as distribution of mainstream content, without compromising on their cultural, artistic and public access goals.

2. Establish a digital archive of live performing arts. There is currently no record of the fine Australian performing arts works!

3. Incentivise diversity in mainstage performing arts companies. There is a real problem in that the major performing arts companies in Australia do not represent the actual population mix. But companies won't change out of goodwill - there will need to be financial incentives, ie government rewards, for change.

I'm not so sure that a national cultural policy should be so focused on the 'young' as part of its policy. Surely a national cultural policy should be beneficial for all Australians, irrespective of their age?

Priorities for a national cultural policy should be support (whether this is financial or physical, in terms of spaces, equipment, studios, etc)for artists, writers, designers, etc under the umbrella of unified recognition and placing of value on the contribution of these individual and their work to Australian culture.

Greater philanthropic and corporate support for culture would be a good priority for a national cultural policy, but this shouldn't be at the expense of (or a substitute for) ongoing government support.

State governmnet support for a national cultural policy, recognising the uniqueness of each state's contributions.

And finally...recognition for the intrinsic worth of arts & culture...they are not always commodities that fit into wider Federal government social and economic agendas...something that used to be a public good (for its own sake) is now a commodity that can be used to fulfill other agendas...does this mean we really value culture or simply value the rhetoric of what culture can be used for ? In an age dominated by the values of economics, technology and science, the value of culture is neglected.

Here's a few ideas to throw into the mix:

1. We need affordable venues to support the creation of new artworks, to nurture an evolving community, to encourage skills exchange and collaboration through co-location of those actively involved in cultural change. To this end, the Renew Newcastle project is a pertinent example of how to involve the community and activate previously dormant spaces, putting them to good use. In Sydney, most of the old warehouses and run down spaces that were available have either closed down, or pushed further out into the suburbs because of gentrification and the lack of affordable housing. In the process there are still many empty buildings in the inner-city area - for example, Redfern St and surrounds is a great opportunity waiting to be seized.

2. This leads to my next point - why not have more of a focus on the collective when it comes to grants and subsidies? It's perhaps a tangential point but it does seem to me that the same established individuals who have well honed grant writing skills and are a 'safe' bet, tend to lap up a lot of the funding. This leaves others who are often more talented (but less adept at grant writing applications) out in the cold.

Why not employ artworkers to help re-invigorate neglected public spaces all over Australia - to inspire curiosity, joy and creativity at the street level, not just in major institutions. The idea here is that we need to take art to the people, where they like to hang out and pass by instead of always expecting the people to attend special places to revere decontextualised work in a gallery space. And when I say artwork in public spaces, I'm not just talking about murals. Think outside that box.

3. At least pretend to take an interest in new media artforms and interdisciplinary work that spills over into all areas of life and 'culture' not just the 'visual arts'. The government needs to take emerging platforms for creating and distributing cultural artefacts more seriously (online, mobile, ambient artworks in the street). Moreover, the fact that we still think of the digital space as 'emerging' is kind of absurd - it's been very firmly here for a long time now, and is only going to offer more opportunity into the future (there are lots of possibilities for augmented reality projects using live data feeds for example).

4. Lastly, for it has to be said, streamline the orchestras for heaven's sake. I'm not suggesting we let go of our heritage, but do we need so many orchestras in Australia? Can we really continue to fund this artform at the expense of others?

Go smalldog - 12 years of neglect has its legacy.

We need an excision to cure the malaise.

Lets get the Australia Council out of Sydney and back on the hymn sheet of supporting artists. If we need to chop the arm of the arms length - then go for it.

If we do not support the next generation of arts makers and arts workers then all is lost - the big end of arts town might well go the way of the titanic!

Firstly, lets empower ourselves and engage with our own creativity rather than whining about what is or isn't unfair.In Regional areas with lack of services and reduced opportunities great art still happens. However it has been difficult for Regional Qld to ge their fair share of Federal funds. Great projects of a national standard happen here and dont get the credit they deserve.So we figure out other ways to get around the metrocentric arts perspective that often prevails and still create great works.

Cultural policy should embrace our national aspirations and how that will be available to ALL. Culture should not be the domain of the few. Artist in residencies, regional tours, online training, engagement with regional galleries and regional arts orgs to work with artists outside the metro, simulcast broadcasts into regional areas of National works such as Bangarra, Australian Ballet etc could help to engage communities who will never get to experience this HIgh art and enjoy any of the $ spent on it. This has been done before through the Sydney Opera house and local theatres in regions across Oz and is a perfect example of using technology to break down the barriers and engage with regional audiences.

To grow Australia’s creative culture, we need to back it – and not just financially. As Australian innovators we should emulate the success of our athletic culture locally and internationally. If we could drum up for example, the same interest and support for Visual Arts as Footy, our cultural and financial position would be greatly improved.

But this would require serious commitment to attending galleries, questioning work, and talking about culture and society with our kids, our mates, and mum and dad. We would need to get some knowledge and ideally some pride in our creative culture.

For this to happen broadly, art needs to be widely seen in papers, on telly and online – as well as explained to audiences. For like Aussie rules, the arts can be difficult to appreciate without explanation.

But how do we get media outlets and audiences interested? Like sport, the arts too are riddled with controversies, yet with the exception of the odd indecency accusation, most occur away from the lime light. But the daily antagonisms and flare-ups within the Australian creative community would make compelling television and reading and would trojan understanding of the inner workings of this culture into lounge rooms.

Naturally arts should not be about argy bargy, but without AFL seasons weekly diet of The Footy Show, Before the Game, Footy Confidential, The Game and The Fifth Quarter bringing Footys dirty laundry and nuances to our attention, AFL would not have anything near the audiences or sponsorship it receives.

While I have focused on AFL and Visual Art, this argument applies across all art forms and Football codes.

I see the Opera and Orchestra funding coping a few punches here.

It’s true that Orchestras and Operas receive the lion’s share of arts funding, but they also employ large numbers of musicians, so we shouldn’t write them off completely.

Though taking into account Peter’s three points, we should absolutely question Operas and Orchestras engagement of youth and the broader community as well as their contribution to Australian Culture.

And maybe ask what might these musicians be creating if they weren't perfecting old European works, but funded to explore their own.

Preservation of existing cultural collections - museums, galleries, libraries and archives, on national, state and local levels. Provide funding for care of these collections and their buildings.

Enable access to these collections. Fund projects that help students, researchers and artists navigate the collections and the public to interact with them.

Enable local access to these collections. For example, researchers in Darwin, Hobart and Adelaide will be disadvantaged by the closures of the National Archive offices in these cities.

Incorporate cultural heritage advisors into all levels of government.

Consider cultural heritage when planning for emergency response - of course lives come first, but history is lost in every fire and flood. Better awareness could help prevent damage and assist with the salvage of collection material (public and private) as soon as is possible after the fact.

Support for a national co-ordinating body for the collections sector - like the Collections Council of Australia, which is due to be closed in early 2010.

Support for bodies like Heritage Victoria, who look after the interests of built heritage, gardens, maritime history, archaeology etc, including huts and bridges out in the bush.

As a young (22 year old) musician I have experienced countless difficulties attempting to follow my passion without any support from the government or governmental bodies. We live in an age where the arts move quickly and aggressively, corporations and pre-established bodies dominate the roads to a financially realistic career and without starting young and pushing oneself hard it's impossible to practice art as more than a hobby.

As an artist I am told by bodies like Centrelink I need to 'get a real job' and 'look for work in different industries', if I were studying at uni the government would be happy to support me in my formulative years, as a musician I am put out to fend for myself. There is no way for my to demonstrate my seriousness, commitment or talent to the government in a plea for support.

Because I make a contemporary style of music (hip-hop) government grants that apply to what I do (the creation of albums, live performance, the replication and duplication of CD's, the sale of merchandise) are extremely few and extremely far between. Those few grants or shows of support that do go to musicians in my industry generally go to them for different reasons (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander support programs etc.) or come from outside, privately funded sources. The royalty payments I receive for my work are small and constitute more of a yearly bonus than any real form of income.

The priority for a national cultural policy should be to develop and aid those in the community least capable of supporting themselves without assistance, the young musicians, artists or dancers that are passionate about their work and lack any means to provide for themselves. If it weren't for the hard work of groups like APRA and Music NSW I would have absolutely no assistance in what I'm doing outside of my own peers group.

Can we not see the irony in the government labeling musicians and artists work as a hobby, yet happily reaping the huge taxation rewards when those artists do find success? I've never heard any form of strong argument against why motivated and serious artists shouldn't receive subsidies and assistance from the government, yet students or trainees should. We need to move forward as a country, the arts are one of the few industries making sure things like global warming, human rights and social responsibilities remain at the forefront of the social conscious, if we don't foster that movement then how can we really expect the kind of social shift that's necessary in this country?

I make my living from writing and playing music and the 12.5 percent drop in people making a living from music is a bit scary.

I have a few suggestions. Increase the percentage of Australian made music that has to be played on Commercial radio, Community radio and TV.

And secondly, there needs to be a review of the noise pollution laws. I have played so many gigs in the last few years where a venue that has had live music for over 10 years, is being forced by complaining neighbours (who have only recently moved nearby), to either shut down any loud music or install volume meters.

You can spend all the money in the world on training the youth but if there are less places to play music, the chances of making a living out if it one day are pretty slim.

I think there should be a national framework for culture to create both cohesion and also to align culture with other national agendas such as social inclusion. Culture is in a uniquely privileged position to both facilitate and celebrate community connection, engagement and social cohesion whilst promoting excellence,diversity and innovation. Culture is indeed symbols of us and is an evolutionary phenomenom best represented in a national context and framework.

1. Cultural policy?

First, what is culture? 'Culture/s' flow from the energies and dynamics of activated, lively and self aware communities. The better the values fostered within a community, the better the culture/s. Culture can be both organically grown (bottom up) and artificially stimulated (‘top’ down) with combinations of the two of course also possible. Thus the genuine scope for a government role even though many may question this!

Vibrant communities have usually benefited over time from a range of different catalysts to become this way. Anything from their responses to overcoming a crisis, to the vision and community leadership shown by particular enlightened and caring citizens over many generations. (Despite the tall poppy syndrome!)

At their best, these communities will also have developed a deeper understanding concerning the true worth of their shared values. And they are constantly seeking to see these values manifested and expressed in even richer and more fulfilling ways.

More often than not, this is done through the arts in all their diverse forms - including harmonious architecture, superior public place design, respect for history & social traditions, stunning public art, greater access and exposure to music in their lives ... all the way through to active engagement in local rituals, shared food experiences and colorful celebrations.

And of course, this process can be facilitated greatly by thoughtful and truly collaborative partnerships with one another and all the relevant community resources - including those managed by government and private enterprise.

Well conceived public funding support can not only help foster artistic activities of value, but also help enhance community support, participation and respect for their own culture cultural life, and collective dreams.

2. Policy needs?

The role of government should not be to determine what defines culture or what the focus of art or the artists should be, but rather to - with great common sense - help the communities define what forces help contribute to achieving exciting creative and artistic outcomes in all art forms and realms of life, for their own collective (and personal) enrichment.

In terms of the outcomes sought, boredom should not be an option. Pandering to self centered artistic egos and artists or projects that have no sense of any meaningful connectivity of their art to other people should also - as far as feasible - be off the table. (Artists who are only interested in communicating to themselves and who blatantly don’t give a damn about anything to do with the wider community should not receive public support. However this should not exclude those making personal statements in ways which are also visibly reaching others, with their genuine blessing.)

Instead, a capacity to excite and stimulate people should be a basic touchstone of success. Great, memorable art, no matter at what level it is practised, always possesses this quality. And achieving such outcomes invariably involves some level of skill and some level of evident power of the imagination, but also of ‘execution’ and ‘practical’ achievement and implementation. (Great ideas alone are not enough, if never brought to life.)

Funding truly imaginative work and projects that 'capture the imagination' of a community and ‘take people's breath away’ is the fundamental need and goal. Get that dynamic properly in place and everything else follows – creative standards rise, excitement increases, greater support and interest flows … and a willingness by individual Australians to more actively support the arts with their own wallets occurs. (That is, not ‘crass commercialism’, but instead loud, meaningful and active, monetary-based statements of appreciation!)

It is important to also acknowledge that negativity and cynicism rarely excite people to effective sustainable actions and responses, whereas by contrast meaningful appeals to hope and positive advancement - if genuine results can be shown – have the power to move people to great personal and social ends.

Therefore, achieving a better balance between supporting (a) arts and project activities that help celebrate and enhance life and (b) those that aim to focus on social evils and angst, should be deliberately fostered and incorporated into funding approaches. (A lesson most Australians clearly now wish would be applied to our ailing cinema industry.)

3. Sound funding principles, not fixed policies, needed

The first key role for government arts agencies in generating such positive and beneficial cultural outcomes is to place the focus of their tax based funding support on funding the proven and most promising ‘innovators’ (for lack of a better word) in all art forms – but at their critical ‘developmental’ phase (when they have least means and capacity to fund themselves). Basically those innovators exhibiting great ideas, imagination, commitment and capacity to deliver … the genuine ‘imagineers’ amongst us all, if you wish.

Help get such people through this early phase and the prospects for their work being more widely publicly admired and respected (and ultimately 'commercially' viable) increase dramatically … as does the health and creative power of Australia’s arts at large.

Judicious and deliberate selectivity here is neither undesirable, nor necessarily exclusive of opportunity. Decades of cultural development experience In Australia have proved that those ‘artists’ with a capacity for truly imaginative ideas usually find these (when successfully manifested as completed works, no matter what the art form) also possess a special ability or power to excite and intrigue even those people frequently stereotyped as the most ‘conservative’ in a community.

However, assistance to innovative, community oriented artists and imaginers should also be tied to several significant qualifying criteria. These would include strong evidence of self motivation, a commitment to results as well as ideas, and some pre-existing track record of personal achievement or evident level of competence and/or potential. Not to forget the final key element – a truly imaginative and inspiring proposal.

The trick is to not unduly limit the artistic horizon, nor the creative vision and its proper execution … something that often does occur when governments spread the funds too thinly … or prematurely take fright at the predictable reactions of every community’s full time ‘knockers’ (the true enemies of innovation).

Better to do one project brilliantly than three or four poorly. (No one wins from the latter outcome, yet in the case of the former, success usually builds more success.) Such developmental phase assistance should in future constitute the ‘priority’ principle of government funding.

Consideration should also in this context be given to broadening the developmental outcomes and benefits by the somewhat simple step of funding community apprenticeships - to advance the skills of other promising and motivated artists whenever significant projects are approved. An ‘old fashioned’ and ‘traditional’ concept maybe, but one still used to great effect in highly creative communities such as those found in Bali. Australia should clearly learn from this experience and success.

And incidentally, receiving a government arts grant should never be viewed as a right. (Sadly this is the way some in the community have wrongfully come to regard it.)

What people are ‘willing to pay for’ does make a meaningful statement and should ultimately matter to a greater extent than it currently does in the arts.

However it is equally important to acknowledge here that the ‘entry’ or ‘developmental’ phase of innovation is not usually one that readily gains such early ‘commercial’ support - thus the need for government, non-profit and private assistance to help play this critical support role, at this critical growth stage.

Then, following this opportunity, we should certainly allow ‘market’ judgments and responses themselves to gradually assume the deciding and greater role.

The second key role for government arts agencies should be as an enabler and facilitator at the arts marketing and selling phases – supporting every sensible professional means by which Australia can help to foster market growth and development for both our arts and our culture at large - particularly in relation to helping our best ‘imagineers’ and artists.

This is the vital missing component – so often great work is created or done but never achieves its rightful ‘audience’ and market impact. And one reason for this is simple, many creatively minded and talented people either don’t have the expertise or capacity, time and focus to successfully undertake such marketing activities.

Government can play an important role in conjunction with private enterprise to fill this gap and see the value of what is being created multiplied and spread more effectively, with benefits to all concerned.

The third key role for government in terms of strengthening cultural policy is to address Australia’s single greatest failing – decades of disastrous design (or lack of it) in relation to urban and suburban (including coastal) ‘architecture’, public spaces/environments and housing.

Not only do these lack harmony and appropriateness in relation to the beauty of their original natural surroundings and environments (Sydney being just one of the leading culprits here) but most of the newer suburbs and their developers and regulators have seriously failed their residents as well.

Again, simply in terms of requiring and encouraging all those key place-making elements and integrated services that facilitate the development of highly livable and healthy (mental as well as physical) community lifestyles and cultures.

This is the level at which Australian culture really functions and develops - for better or for worse (outbreaks of violence being just one of the potential negative manifestations). And such lack of government attention - in the midst of diverting too much attention to greedy developers – may well ensure that it will lean towards ‘for worse’ … at least until the whole policy outlook changes here for the better.

I think that arts and cultural development for rural communities, of which, many are devoid or have only minimal opportunities. I am an art teacher in a small community and find it difficult to sustain a high level of inspiration with only few opportunities for development, skill sharing and seeing innovative arts practices. I think it would lead rural communities towards a more generally open minded and inclusive mentality.

The priorities for a national cultural policy need to include strategies that encourage participation and acknowledgement of culture - and I don't mean grand national gestures - I mean average everyday people stopping for a moment to think about what they value about their way of life and making a conscious decision to honour it, protect it and celebrate it.

Work needs to be done to ensure that ownership of culture stays in the hands of people. The Cultural Policy needs to offer guidelines which govern the way we work in cultural industries - certainly honouring high arts but not at the expense of simple cultural activity that working and middle class Australians can engage with and understand.

The acadmemia has baffled and intimidated the everyday Australian for too long with their talk of arts in such complex and academic terms. It is time to start talking about the arts as something that reflects and celebrates our stories, our traditions, our views and our ideas.

The Arts have been comodified in past decades and I feel that this is to the detriment of our culture. Once upon our time - cultural experiences like dancing, singing, story telling, reading, playing music, watching theatre or film - were everday things that people did without thinking - now these things are allocated as arts and therefore marketed as products which can be profited from.

Our cultural activity should not be seen as something that can provide a financial return. Whilst investment in protecting and celebrating our culture will provide significant benefits that will ensure a socially connected, happy and aware society it is ridiculous to think about it in normal fiscal ways.

• To include sponsored musical education facilities and instruments to under privileged children whose parents combined income is less then for eg. $50,000. They have option of leasing an instrument and are given an option of classical education in the first year and then they can select an option of choosing a music genre that is available. These programs have been very successful in other countries Sponsored Music education for lower income families can provide a valuable contribution in creating a harmonious intelligent and less aggressive youth culture especially from lower income families

• More broad minded programmers in the ABC to include content from local producers. As the ABC have their own label they tend to promote 100 % of their own artiste. Other do get a look in but only rarely. They rather promote international acts rather then localized culture on Dig radio especially. Their programmers are public servants who have been the same for the last 20-30years. Who hold key positions and control cultural content. Speaking from experience. Independent CDS from Australia who get played on different stations worldwide will not get played on the ABC Dig Radio that’s a shame. ABC needs to be more culturally inclusive for local independent artiste as the new digital age has created has taken the control from the majors to a lot more independent producers who will be supported overseas but not from the conservative ABC. I am speaking from personal experience

Two great challenges central to a policy are to outline the scope, and to offer a means to assess. Too often we think of culture as elite music and painting, but does our culture not embrace a wider range of art, music, building, landscape and activity? Should our policy not embrace public participation, both active and passive, as well as our cultural elites?

And shouldn't we have a way to judge progress against our policy, not only as inputs (spending) but also outcomes (new insights)? Too often we gauge success of an exhibition in terms of spending, but shouldn't we also assess entertainment, education, and the provocation of new insights?

The value and important of collecting institutions should not be overlooked. Museum's hold the collective memories of people. They act as a reference as to where we have come from as a nation and as a world. They act as places of inspiration, holders of knowledge and reminders of some of the greatest tragedies ever enacted by human kind reminding us of wrong decisions made to devastating effect.

To overlook the value of Museums and other collecting institutions in the new national cultural policy would be a tragedy!! And not just Museums that focus on Australian history. The world is too small for that now. We are now part of a global experience and museums that hold international antiquities such as the Abbey Museum, Caboolture, Qld, provide us with a global picture, they give us the benefit of international knowledge and experience. To ignore Museums and collecting institutions within the National Cultural policy is to deny the basic human need to connect with our roots, to understand where we have come from and be inspired to a greater future.

RESPECT, DIGNITY & RESOLUTION..... The ART's are not valued or supported to the caliber of the impact on society they share.. as people, as families, as friends, as neighbors, and as countrymen... The power to be... the will to do and courage to truly stand up for what we believe in.. That we as Australian's are empowered through creative expression, and encouraged through the works of our living. WE ARE.

Acknowledgement of our rural culture and heritage, challenges of a harsh unforgiving climate, how they are met and dealt with

I've been fascinated by the Men's Shed movement and think it needs to be expanded. There are many skills to be transferred between generations, along with cultural knowledge and building respect and relationships within communities.

Men's Sheds seem to be a bit like Youth Centres in having a narrow focus and could benefit from expanding their audience. Some sort of community college model, like the Anarchist University concept maybe? http://www.anarchistu.org/cgi-bin/twiki/view/Anarchistu

There seems to be a visible shift toward a more commercialised film industry insofar as the strategies of the Federal and State Screen Agencies are concerned. There remains, however, an important needs for a space in which experimental, or more arthouse Australian cultural cinema fare can be made and seen. Perhaps the traditional Arts & Cultural agencies can work toward taking arthouse cinema into the fold along with the more traditional artforms. This may ensure that accomplished art filmmakers are not left stranded in the new commercialised screen landscape without a forum for exploring unique Australian voices on screen.

I would like to see the local content quota for the Television networks (commercial and public) both increased and enforced heavily. I think on top of this there should be a required quota for dramatic content aimed towards 18-30 year-olds. I and all the people I know have no connection to locally produced dramatic TV content (and I define dramatic as not only the 'drama' genre but also comedy). There just aren't realistic representations of what it means to be a young person living in this country (no, we're not all like the people you see in Packed to the Rafters); where are the shows with people discussing music festivals, going to university, going to clubs, working trades, getting kebabs, playing video games, going on camping trips, making short films for Tropfest, going on roadtrips, having REALISTIC relationships? The list is endless because it's our entire lifestyle and it's not being displayed in any form on Australian television sets, as a result I believe that disillusionment with what we are seeing has well and truly set it.

Comedy is my field and passion so I would also like to mention the severe lack of locally scripted comedy content (sitcoms etc) on the major networks. I don't even think there is one current sketch show in production/being aired. Topical shows like The Chaser and Hungry Beast and researched semi-doco's like Lawrence Leung and John Safran are great, but they to me they don't sit in the same category as a Sketch show that has been created by a group of young writers and performers who have humorous and meaningful messages to give to our society. All my above examples have been produced by either the ABC or SBS, and I think that the commercial networks should be taking on a lot more local scripted comedy content, even if it is begrudgingly under pressure from government regulation.

We, as a generation, have almost nothing relevant left to see on Australian television, and as a result we are moving towards overseas sources to be engaged by compelling content. This is being aided by online file sharing and video streaming, and without any action that sees the advance of local dramatic content created by and aimed towards young adults (I do not refer to television that is being scripted by baby-boomers who are totally out of touch, creating characters called AJ and Stacey who like hanging out at the milk bar and talk about how hard it is to research their essay that is due on Friday for Mr Porter because to get to the library they have to walk through the park that is Baker Street Crew territory. It's called Wikipedia, Stace, get on with the research and then hurry up and run away from home because your Mums partner made advances towards you) it is entirely possible that we will lose all interest and faith in what Australian television has to offer.

The development of a definition of Culture - as separate to the arts. The arts is but one expression of our national cultural identity.

The development of a separate, national arts policy that looks to support all levels of arts engagement - from the grassroots to the export level.

I would like multiculturalism to encompass grassroots initiatives aimed at making the host society more receptive to migrants and refugees, as well as more tailored orientation and education programs for those arriving on Australian shores.

While the visa regimes welcome "skilled migrants", I have often seen such people drive cabs and feel alienated by employers and the public at large. Then there is the issue of greater representation of minorities in the media that steers clear of stereotypes. SBS seems like a token gesture and is almost an excuse for the other broadcasters and publications to continue with an idea of Australia that is inward-looking. Both public policy and public culture must reward enterprise in business, the arts and other spheres, or we risk getting complacent and disappointing those who comes here with new hopes and dreams.

Removed by moderator - this was a duplicate comment

There are no longer any Community Cultural Development courses available in Australia except at VCA, Melbourne, which is an internal / full contact course. I asked a local CCD professional to help me find a course and she contacted her colleagues around the country and it's true.

Both the CCD NSW and the CAN SA Diploma courses are on hold due to lack of funding, leaving VCA the only one (which is no good for me since I am near Cairns in Queensland, with a child and a partner who would be very reluctant to relocate).

This is a shocking result for the advancement of Community Cultural Development in Australia.

I think the oft neglected collecting institutions, museums and archives, need to be much better supported. So many of our nation's stories of everyday people are kept by small community groups with few resources and dependant on volunteers.

There needs to be funding for capital works so that community museums are not automatically allocated the disused old building in town but instead could have a building that better meets the needs of the collection and the community. Where transport collections are involved proper weather protection is very expensive but essential.

There also needs to be funding and support for community museums to be able to employ professional staff. It took some years for libraries to make this transition, now it is time for our collecting institutions.

Preserving our cultural identity should not be optional. It is not only the role of the major state institutions but will also assist a community in understanding its past so it can work together for the future.

I strongly believe, Art and Music industry need a lot of help and support, Art industry even in third world countries get more support from Government then Australia.

That’s why all the Artists and Musicians are tempting to leave the country and we are losing artists instead of getting them to the Country.

Make Australia a Friendly Country for Artists like sport people.

Removed by moderator - this was a duplicate comment

A national cultural policy should provide a mandate for public institutions to be responsible and accountable for the preservation of material culture, with specific emphasis on public access regionally and nationally.

- inclusive to all Australians

- a focus on young people

- the ambition to place arts and culture at the centre of the lives of Australians, offering entry points from birth to death

I think the biggest priority is to ensure equity across the spectrum of cultural policy.

Our culture by definition is a broad and evolving beast but the criticism has always been that sport has taken precedence and when it comes to art the money has been splurged on the so-called flagship companies who don't represent value for money.

So should it not be down to people to decide where their taxes are spent, perhaps local funding bodies could be established to relate to specific needs in communities for infrastructure and cultural development.

A case in point is the investment in bidding for a Football World Cup we may not win, $46 million is a lot of risk for short term economic gain in the future, which could have otherwise have been spent supporting communities and the development of cultural capital now!

Removed by moderator - this was a duplicate comment

Recognise that cultural heritage is part of Culture, alongside the various forms of creative arts.

Acknowledge that cultural heritage is not only held in the National Institutions, and that the Australian Government could help shape the preservation and interpretation of cultural heritage across the country.

Encourage a whole-of-government approach to cultural heritage, so that fields such as education, innovation, social inclusion, emergency management and broadband initiatives can all contribute directly.