Open letter regarding the future of Film Australia within the new Australian Scr

Concerned Documentary Filmmakers

PO Box 7176

Bondi NSW 2026

21 August 2007

Senator the Hon George Brandis SC

Minister for the Arts and Sport

Parliament House

Canberra ACT

CC:

Senator Helen Coonan, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts

Senator Stephen Conroy, Shadow Minister for Communications and Information Technology

Mr Peter Garrett MP, AM, Shadow Minister for the Arts

Ms Patricia Scott, Secretary, DCITA

Mr Brian Rosen, CEO, Film Finance Corporation

Mr Graham Bradley, Chair, Film Finance Corporation

Mr Chris Fitchett, Acting CEO, Australian Film Commission

Ms Maureen Barron, Chair, Australian Film Commission

Ms Daryl Karp, CEO, Film Australia

Mr Stephen Skala, Chair, Film Australia

Mr Geoff Brown, Executive Director, Screen Producers Association of Australia

Mr Drew MacRae, Executive Director, Australian Directors Guild

Ms Jacqueline Woodman, Executive Director, Australian Writers Guild

Dear Minister,

We, the undersigned, a group of leading independent documentary filmmakers, believe it is in the best interests of the future of our production sector and the efficient delivery of the Government’s direct funding through the merged Agency independent documentary community that Film Australia’s funding, educational programs and archive resources be fully incorporated into the new Australian Screen Authority (ASA). We believe this can be achieved without any reduction in quality and can deliver the necessary outcomes that the Federal Government attached to the National Interest Program, the History Initiative and the Digital Learning program.

In making this statement, we wish to acknowledge Film Australia’s rich heritage, producing some of our most memorable documentaries. However, we believe the organisation is clinging to an outdated model of production no longer appropriate for the 21st Century. The administrative cost of operating Film Australia with its high overheads and commissioning structure and production company model has made it an inefficient organisation and, in recent times, its internal culture has alienated it from many of the country’s best documentary practitioners.

We have decided to write this letter independently of the Guilds of which we are members (SPAA, ADG and AWG) to reinforce the need for a change in the way Film Australia has recently conducted business.

We strongly advocate the following:

1) That the precious National Interest Program (NIP) and History Initiative – that have funded some of Australia’s most important films – should be curated by the ASA but not ‘produced’ by a continuing Film Australia operating within the ASA – as has been the model up until now. The production company model is incompatible with both a Statutory Authority, as the ASA will become, and with a competitive and efficient independent production sector.

2) Following from above, that the existing EP commissioning structure should be abolished and replaced by project managers with a consultancy rolefulfilling the necessary curatorial functions to fulfil the objectives of the NIP and History Initiative.

3) That the terms of trade under which Film Australia has subcontracted the NIP and History Initiative to the independent production sector be radically reformed. In particular the issues of 100% copyright ownership, editorial control, diminished branding for production partners and compulsory distribution arrangements all need to be overturned.

4) That Film Australia’s archive library should be transferred to the National Film & Sound Archive and managed as a discrete collection within the NFSA with access to it maintained on the same terms of trade as currently exist.

5) That the Digital Learning program be combined with Film Australia’s current marketing and non-theatrical distribution operation and managed as ashould also be operated through then online access portal through the ASA.

6) That  we support the concept of a production cluster on the Lindfield site, which currently has 32 tenants providing services of value to the wider Australia film and television production industry, but are of the view that it should not be the responsibility of funding currently allocated to Film Australia to maintain the site for this purpose.  We believe a more efficient administrative structure fulfilling the current functions of Film Australia can be created with a physical move away from the Lindfield site to join the new ASA.

We request that the Steering Committee currently being convened by DCITA to look at the future operation of the ASA take note of our views, given that we represent a significant majority of current practitioners in Australia and a majority of subcontractors that have worked with Film Australia over the past decade.

We believe a consultation process regarding the future structure and operation of the ASA must be established with the wider industry as a matter of urgency in the interests of developing the best policy outcomes.

Yours sincerely (in alphabetical order):

9.         Bevan Childs                          Message from Moree