ARTS CONCIL GRANTS

Rip It Up, Issue 175, 1 February 1992, Page 8

ARTS CONCIL GRANTS

I notice that you always print the results of the latest QE Il Recorded Music Panels grants, but | wonder if you've ever seen past them? Enclosed are copies of the minutes for November. : ' Solo bands or performers had a 98 percent rejection rate, while : compilations had a 33 percent rejection rate. Furthermore, if you were stupid enough not to know the new rule that only the first track on a demo tape matters, then tough! Now the Healthy Sponsorship Council is being asked to take over the lousy $50,000 a year. With a bit of luck the QEll won't have to put any money at all into young people’s music. The greedy greys and their “professional” servants, in pursuit of “professional” standards grab almost all the money every year. For the 1990 year $2,016,000 was granted by the QEI to regional orchestras and operas. Probably a further $6,000,000 went directly to the NZ Symphony from the Lottery Board and $1,341,000 went from QEll to the Royal NZ Ballet. -Bands received $48,000 or 2.4 percent of the money available for orchestras and operas. Add the oftier - figures to the Concert Programme and

you wouldn't even have 1 percent of the money for music by men (only) who died in Europe more than 100 years ago. In 1987 the QEII commissioned AGB-McNair to study the sizeand characteristics of arts audiences. The QEII has known since early 1988 that only 13 percent of the population goes to classical music and only 7.6 percent are interested in opera. Needless to say the QEll is so class-based and so full of vested interests that this study made no difference at all to their “investment” decisions. In fact, the funding for classical music increased each year since the study was completed. Yet this is public money. The greedy greys are not the only generation which spends money on Lotto (90 percent of QEII money comes from the Lottery Board). Young and usually unemployed people are kept starving while classical music money is generally given to people who are already working. Their class needs the exira? But the worst thing is that this money goes to Trusts, who operate increasingly viable businessesby - avoiding taxes. So they compete unfairly with those of us who do pay what we owe. Most of the QEII grants money is given fo these Trusts, once they have proved they are a viable business. Canterbury Opera's - chairman described Canterbury Opera as “a very viable business” last year, when it reached “Permanent Client” status. This is all done in the name of being “professional”. “Professional” ie degreed) managers and panellists choose “professional” musicians for the pleasure of the professional class. Without a degree you can usually forget it. Even in the Recording Grants, degreed or university-associated applicants are favoured. And here you strike that other mark of class superiority. Classical music grants are “permanent” whereas young people get the once-only treatment. You have to be very lucky to get more than one rant. Also young people only get f?.lnded to record, not to perform. The “professional” class has to have live sexist entertainment. But young people have to make do with mass media. This is the QEll mark of our class, cheap and not very visible. ~ The Arts Council Act is about to be reviewed. Public submissions close on March 13. Please urge your readers to write their opinions to Douglas ;

Graham, Minister of Cultural Affairs, Parliament Buildings, before this date. Yours sincerely, - ALAN CHANT