Creative NZ Slammed, Again | Newsroom
Terry Sheat
Terry Sheat is a graduate of Victoria Uni BCA/LLB(Hons) and a retired partner of Linklaters, an international law firm based in London.
ReadingRoom
Shakespeare row fuels call for inquiry
Creative New Zealand should be about embracing all forms of art and all artists. It should be flexible, empathetic and responsive. It should have a well understood and fair system for allocating funds, with checks and balances throughout. It should operate under proper governmental oversight and public accountability.
But this is a far-off dream. Creative NZ missed the memo. Somewhere along the way that vision has become subverted, as demonstrated by the recent termination of funding to Shakespeare Globe Centre NZ, which has angered many. However the problem goes much deeper than this one example.
I have instituted a call for a public inquiry into the fairness and lawfulness of CNZ’s funding priorities. It’s already circulating widely on social media and is gaining good traction. National’s arts spokesperson Simon O’Connor has voiced his support. Stephen Wainwright, the CEO of Creative NZ, has acknowledged the call, and its strong sentiments, but declined to comment on its content.
An inquiry would mark a once-in-a-generation opportunity to review CNZ’s policies and actions and to address the problems the arts sector has with CNZ.
CNZ has a prescriptive and inflexible view of what artistic endeavours are worthy of funding. To be funded, and funded fairly, you must fit within CNZ’s vision of what art should be in New Zealand. The Arts Council, which is supposed to be in control, is most likely being led around by its nose by CNZ and seems to be functioning as little more than a rubber stamp. Governmental oversight is non-existent. No one is held to account.
As well as de-funding, there is a gradual and insidious underfunding of CNZ’s non-preferred grant recipients. Many must suspect that they are already on the slippery slope.
It amounts to a systemic bias because there are duties under the empowering legislation which CNZ must take into account. Duties that are independent of, and not intended to be interpreted through, CNZ’s focus on a “New Zealand identity” in the arts. Duties such as promoting freedom in the practice of the arts, supporting activities of artistic and cultural significance that develop the creative potential of artists and art forms, and supporting projects of merit to communities or sections of the population that would otherwise not have access to them.
On those considerations alone, it’s hard to see how CNZ can justify the termination of funding to either Shakespeare Globe Centre NZ or Arts on Tour. Both have been around for over 20 years so it would be possible to argue that they are part of a New Zealand identity in the arts (just not the definition CNZ has chosen). Both also have strong credentials in inclusion and diversity. It would seem as though these organisations may have been excluded before any proper consideration of those duties or that promoting a “New Zealand identity” in the arts has been given improper weight and therefore used improperly to exclude them.
If I were to mark CNZ’s funding criteria and outcomes against the duties under the legislation, I would be forced to give them a failing grade. I wouldn’t give them funding. They are not delivering to the proper scope of their mission statement. Diversity is not diversity of “New Zealand art”, it is diversity of all art in New Zealand, with freedom of artistic expression for all. That is literally in the statute.
In the case of Shakespeare Globe Centre NZ, funding was terminated primarily if not solely because Shakespeare is, to quote CNZ’s assessment, “located within a canon of imperialism” and not “relevant to a decolonising Aotearoa in the 2020s and beyond”. Vincent O’Sullivan dismissed this as nonsense in his letter published last week in the Otago Daily Times, describing it as “a breathtaking absurdity from a government body whose brief is to promote excellence in the arts”. An editorial in Stuff said that “the CNZ assessment has exposed the obvious problems that come with interpreting art through the narrow lens of national identity and politics”.
Just this morning the Prime Minster, Jacinda Ardern, stated she was a fan of the Shakespeare Globe Centre NZ programme having participated in it herself as a secondary school pupil. She urged CNZ and SGCNZ to meet and sort it out: “I understand the parties might be coming back to talk with one another, if that hasn’t happened already I encourage that to happen. But as I say, I participated in it, thought it was a great programme and still do.” For a government agency this amounts to an instruction: take this problem away from me!
But the problem is much more pervasive than just one funding round or a couple of disappointed applicants. The issue is at the core of the general stewardship of the health and well-being of the arts in Aotearoa New Zealand. CNZ appears to be busy funding new arts organisations in their own image to replace existing professional arts infrastructure, and then progressively de-funding those original organisations because they do not align with CNZ’s philosophy. It’s dangerous and self-fulfilling stuff.
Creative NZ should be a trusted and respected organisation with the full faith and backing of the wider arts community. It is not. It’s time for a public inquiry so that all affected parties and the public can have their views heard.
