Summit on the arts deserves our attention

Ahead of Marlborough's Arts Summit, stage and screen veteran GAVIN RICHARDS, who brought War Child to the Marlborough stage, speaks out about the state of the region's arts and culture.

A famous Dutch poet wrote "everything of value is defenceless." It was a serious warning.

On November 18 there will be a meeting in Marlborough called an Arts Summit organised by the Marlborough District Council to discuss its Arts and Cultural Strategy.

At that meeting the tone will be set for this community to spend maybe tens of millions of dollars on the arts. The chances are, though, that you won't know much about it or have been alerted to the impact this meeting could have on life in Marlborough. The meeting is not a public meeting but it should be welcomed and watched closely by everyone with an interest in our future development.

The last period for which Statistics New Zealand has reliable figures show the New Zealand population spent $7-7.5 billion on cultural products in the year to March 2001. Arts contributed 3.01% to total Gross Domestic Product (GDP - the total value of goods and services produced by a nation). Spending has probably doubled since 2001 and in our corporate driven society the arts are emerging as THE growth industry of the 21st Century. However, New Zealand imports far more cultural product than it exports. Government economists are fully aware of this and all political parties have responded with arts policies. Many experts close to the issue do not believe that economic development without cultural roots will ever be sustainable.

So what do we mean by 'culture'? If we define it to mean the entire system of beliefs, practices and customs that exist in a society, then it is surely the foundation that supports every development and 'the arts' are the most complex expression of it.

Defined in turn, the arts are specific forms of human communication ? painting, sculpture, graphics, design, music, the written word, dance, theatre, circus, architecture, fashion, film, photography and so on. Joost Smiers of the European Research Institute for Comparative Cultural Policy puts it like this: "The arts mould our mental framework, our language, our tonal and visual landscape, our understanding of past and present, our feelings about others, our imagery of thought, and our moral concepts. A rich and diversified cultural climate is something that needs protection." The arts are not a luxury.

American and British corporate driven culture is delivered to us via tv, cinema, video, radio, internet and cell phone, through the corporate take over of publishing of virtually every written word from this newspaper to our children's nursery rhymes and textbooks, through the images and brand logos that assail us on every high street and which we wear on our bodies, the music that is piped to us in shopping malls, at sports grounds, in swimming pools and restaurants, or downloaded; all this is just part of a global development in which the needs of advertising and shareholders have the lion's share of influence. Every culture on earth is now profoundly affected, and yet, as consumers we are encouraged to sit back passively accepting whatever is on offer. Mainly, I believe, because we lack a background of debate from which to articulate an effective response and a popular vocabulary for describing how the Arts deeply influence the way we live. Worldwide, though, the big debate has begun and this Arts Summit has been called because of it.

MDC have a published Arts & Culture Strategy which it is developing because it has a political obligation to do so. The national arts and cultural policy announced by the Government demonstrated concern for the development of both cultural enterprises and creative industries. The policy purposes are: " to nurture and sustain vibrant arts and cultural activities which all New Zealanders can enjoy and through which a strong and confident cultural identity can emerge, and to back a strong creative industry sector which provides sustainable employment and is able to contribute to economic growth and prosperity."

That policy exists within the framework of United Nations initiatives regarding Arts & Culture culminating at the 33rd UNESCO General Conference in Paris in October 2005 at which New Zealand voted for the adoption of the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (CCD). The approval of this important International Treaty is a moral victory in the long-running fight to preserve the world's cultural richness. The Convention sets out common rules, principles and points of reference for global cultural diversity which empowers the arts within local communities. It is the first time the international community has been able to reach such a consensus on these questions. Our government participated actively at each stage of the intergovernmental negotiations. Now it is seeking to bring our legislation into line with the Treaty and develop a strategy to protect the Arts which are identified as an essential part of our democracy.

But are they prepared to fund these developments? So far, not a lot. Central government funding on offer is cruelly inadequate. Rather like throwing one bag of rice into a refugee camp it has had divisive and corrupting effects. If similarly small populations in Ireland and Finland can fund their Arts properly why can't we do likewise?

The second part of the government statement concerning creative industries clearly points towards the development of a sector of artistic production in which artists are able to make a livelihood within their communities not simply have their skills treated as a worthy pastime, a leisure diversion or hobby. Once again the government has tried to make the right noises. In 2001 in line with its new Arts & Cultural Strategy and with practice in many other countries it unveiled Pathways To Arts & Cultural Employment (PACE). This legislation requires that Work & Income New Zealand (WINZ) treat the Creative Industries in a special way - assisting artists with proven qualifications to claim unemployment benefit for a period in order to build artistic enterprises. This platform has been used around the country with success. WINZ in Marlborough, however, have never heard of this legislation and scoff at you if you walk in and attempt to access it.

A growing group of our young people have left the district to pursue, often successful, careers in the arts. At the present time there is absolutely no incentive or financial cushion provided for them to return. For the sake of cultural diversity if we are serious about developing a modern arts Sector then council should, at the very least, be requiring WINZ to live up to it's responsibilities. Meanwhile, in many other areas of the country, small groups are emerging from, and supported by, their communities to develop film-making, arts centres, theatre groups, tertiary educational courses and so on. This Summit is an opportunity to call for similar initiatives in Marlborough. Indeed the existing Marlborough policy highlights, 'regional branding, cultural tourism and creative industries" as goals to be achieved in regional development. In effect, the present arts Sector which is largely maintained by voluntary effort needs to be reinvigorated by a new, qualified and properly remunerated sector.

The same policy also calls for "greater visibility and emphasis on the importance of a flourishing arts and cultural sector." Dynamic leadership will be required to steer this province away from the national perception of us as a cultural backwater. Representing such a hugely diverse field of endeavour and in order to obtain a truly democratic mandate upon which MDC can base future policy will, also I believe, require an informed and protracted public debate. The summit on November 18th should be expected to promote that debate by seizing the public imagination in defence of the heart of our community.

Further information about the ARTS SUMMIT is obtainable from Lyne Johnson at Marlborough District Council.

- The Marlborough Express