[tof] FFC Guidelines comment and clarification.

[tof at lists.culture2.org]

Hi John - sounds good. Just confirming our catch-up this Sat morning 
10am at Small Block??
Steve.

>Thanks to all those who responded to Julie Marlow's invitation to 
>comment on the FFC draft guidelines, there is some good news in the 
>wings. There has been a lot of discussion around this FFC 
>documentary guidelines issue through ASDA and SADC over the last few 
>weeks. It is now rumored that the FFC has decided to confirm their 
>earlier intention - endorsed at the AIDC -  to back a 50\50 
>allocation of documentary financing (maximum of 60% either way each 
>round) in the new guidelines. In taking this position  - assuming 
>that it will be confirmed in the guidelines to be published shortly 
>-  the FFC have acknowledged their commitment to local content, and 
>resisted the pressure of a small group of producers to formally 
>increase their access to the documentary allocation, at the expense 
>of local content. Equally importantly the FFC will have endorsed a 
>process of genuine consultation, which is very welcome indeed. And 
>furthermore it will demonstrate that it is possible for filmmakers 
>to influence the environment in which they work, when policy issues 
>are more openly discussed. It will be interesting to see if the 
>television people can meet the opportunities this policy could open 
>up. JH
>
>On 27/03/2006, at 4:14 PM, tof at lists.culture2.org wrote:
>
>>Dear All,
>>
>>Firstly, please extend the deadline for comment on FFC guidelines to
>>Wednesday 5th April.  I have posted that on the SPAA website.
>>
>>I'd just like to clarify a few things regarding the latest iteration of the
>>guidelines:
>>
>>SADC had a conference call with Brian Rosen and Mary Anne Read on the
>>guidelines on Friday March 17th.  The latest draft from the FFC had only
>>just been released, and came out of the FFC's 'on the road' discussions in
>>Melbourne and other states that week.  December Films had also presented
>>them with another model to consider at the Melbourne meeting.  Many
>>producers were therefore still grappling with the first version from the
>>FFC, and the FFC then needed time to collate all the messages they received
>>at the guidelines meetings and put together the next draft for circulation.
>>
>>
>>The "broad" endorsement from SADC was just that.  We anticipated more
>>feedback, hence the posting on tof at the end of last week, and on the SPAA
>>website as of today.  Those who have come back with the 60/40% model have
>>done so having done some financial modelling that to be honest the FFC
>>should have done in the first place to give us all concrete examples of how
>>series funding and one-offs would work in this new environment where Accords
>>and Non-Accords are collapsed.   I don't see what's undemocratic about any
>>producer, regardless of the organisation they are part of, putting in their
>>views after going to open meetings specifically designed to encourage debate
>>and further suggestions.
>>
>>Rather than thinking in cultural/commercial 'factional' terms, we should
>>perhaps be examining how best to ensure a healthy sector by enabling both
>>cultural and commercial films.  I'm sure everyone's aware that these FFC
>>guidelines are intended to represent the fairest way of using not enough
>>money.  In relation to more money , the FFC have put in their triennial bid.
>>It goes through the Federal Government's Economic Review Committee process,
>>recommendations are made to Treasury and the result is in the budget, or
>>not.  So, May will be the time we get to know.
>>
>>And, everyone who is contributing to this argument has some level of
>>self-interest, and it's disingenuous to pretend otherwise.
>>
>>Julie Marlow
>>
>>
>>
>>Message: 1
>>Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 08:44:41 +1100
>>From: tof at lists.culture2.org
>>Subject: Fwd: [tof] ATTENTION ALL DOCUMENTARY MAKERS
>>To: <tof at lists.culture2.org>
>>Message-ID: <C04D5679.1B6A%tzub at ozemail.com.au>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>>
>>Dear All,
>>
>>I thought democracy was a principle that was sacrosanct especially amongst
>>documentary filmmakers, and here we have SADC - a peak representative
>>organisation side-lined by a group of producers who out of pure self
>>interest make a last minute bid to the get a greater bite of the cherry. It
>>makes a mockery of the whole SADC process. In my position as a SADC ASDA
>>representative I think its important to clarify events that have happened
>>over the past few weeks. This is some of the back-story:
>>
>>The FFC documentary guidelines have taken several weeks to fine tune. The
>>FFC organised industry meetings across the country to solicit views of the
>>constituency, and SADC was very active in taking on board those opinions and
>>acting as a sounding board for the FFC. Everyone thought they had an agreed
>>position. Then just days before the FFC board meeting a group of well known
>>producers, most of them involved in series production, got together and
>>heavily lobbied the FFC. The result are the guidelines in the earlier TOF
>>email.
>>
>>The vital paragraph that was changed was: "No more than 60 per cent of the
>>funds of a particular round will be allocated through any one funding door"
>>(ie in one funding round)
>>
>>It now reads: "There will be a notional allocation of 60 per cent of the
>>funds for the international door and 40 per cent for the domestic door, with
>>no more than a 10 per cent swing either way at any one round."
>>
>>The arguments used by the series lobbyists for these changes are that a
>>straight 50/50% split of the total available funds of $8m (not counting the
>>Innovation Fund) would not necessarily provide enough per annum funding for
>>even a base level of series production requiring international pre-sales. In
>>addition, domestic documentary has other dedicated funding doors, through
>>Film  Australia, the Innovation Fund, and AFC funding.
>>
>>The FFC has heard the arguments and is willing to go either way, depending
>>on what the majority of documentary filmmakers want.  They have given us
>>till April 3 to canvass membership, and come up with a definitive decision
>>either way. I agree with JH, the FFC must be applauded for seriously
>>consulting with filmmakers on questions of allocating precious government
>>funds, and they have given us one last chance to express our views.
>>
>>So I appeal to you all to express your feelings on this latest issue.
>>Please contribute your thoughts to this list and also directly email Julie
>>Marlow julie at spaa.org.au  <mailto:julie at spaa.org.au> .  Julie Marlow will
>>collate responses on behalf of  SADC, and SADC will then advise the FFC
>>accordingly on April 3.
>>
>>We only have till the end of this week to respond, so as to give Julie a
>>time to collate all the comments,
>>
>>Tom Z
>>
>>
>>JOHN HUGHES WROTE:
>>
>>Dear Julie, Thanks for this latest. This seems to be an unfortunate back
>>down from the previous position - widely discussed and outlined at AIDC -
>>that allocated equally between local and international projects. I find this
>>surprising, I wonder where it has come from? Also there seems to some doubt
>>about whether the FFC has also stepped back from their other good idea -
>>involving peer assessment in the process. I guess the good news is that the
>>FFC has been seriously consulting on these questions of allocating
>>government (tax payer) financing, as the AFC has done for years. Influence
>>on these policies, and improvements in the agencies practices are being
>>achieved by membership based organisations, ASDA and SADC.   Sadly this kind
>>of relative transparency, accountability and collegiate engagement with the
>>documentary industry/culture seems these days to be beyond the imagination
>>or capability of the public broadcasters. On the 60/40 question - I for one
>>preferred the previous model, which already had built in the capacity for
>>the FFC to allocate with flexibility round by round.  Count me in on the
>>equal allocations local / international. The arguments you make defending
>>this unbalanced allocation don't hold up I reckon. JH
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>tof mailing list
>tof at lists.culture2.org
>http://lists.culture2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tof
>
>!DSPAM:2000,44461f98859661296816981!


-- 
 From Steve Thomas,
Lecturer in Documentary,
Film & TV School,
Victorian College of the Arts, University of Melbourne
234 St Kilda Rd, Southbank, Vic 3006
Dir Tel: (03) 9685 9018
Admin Tel: 9685 9000
Fax: 9685 9001
http://www.vca.unimelb.edu.au