As often as not, before the existence of the MCA there was no representation on behalf of the musical world in Australia when issues affecting it arose, because there was no organisation that took responsibility for the whole of music rather than small sections of it. Music has been the loser.
MCA sees as one of its primary reasons for existence a role as music's advocate. In some instances it acts alone. In others, it collaborates with other national bodies, whether music organisations with a special focus such as choral music, national cross-arts form organisations where it speaks for music, such as ArtsPeak, the national alliance of arts service and advocacy organisations, or the National Advocates for Arts Education. It also participates in international organisations such as the International Music Council and the International Network for Cultural Diversity.
Some advocacy is reactive, responding to events in the world such as initiatives by governments or the bureaucracy. Some advocacy is proactive: the Music Council perceives a need and takes a decision to advocate change.
Current advocacy projects
These documents require Adobe PDF reader software to beinstalled on your computer before they can be viewed.
Download the free Adobe Acrobat Reader software here.
2010 Review of the Australian Independent Screen Production Sector
Submission to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts
Prepared by Lynn Gailey May 6, 2010
With the possible exception of India, there are no screen industries in the world that do not receive government subsidy. Even the industry in the USA now receives subsidy from American states and foreign countries. Australian screen subsidies must be sufficient to support a sustainable industry.
Australia attracts foreign productions through such financial incentives, but it cannot depend upon being host to foreign productions. They are subject to too many variables beyond our control. Expenditures from offshore fell from $105m in 2008 to $2m in 2009! A key to the sustainability of the industry is that it is able to offer continuing employment to people of talent and expertise.
Australia attracts foreign productions through such financial incentives, but it cannot depend upon being host to foreign productions. They are subject to too many variables beyond our control. Expenditures from offshore fell from $105m in 2008 to $2m in 2009! A key to the sustainability of the industry is that it is able to offer continuing employment to people of talent and expertise.
There is a severe lack of comprehensive data on the Australian industry in its many ramifications. This is now exacerbated by the cessation of ABS activity for the film industry. The government is investing in this industry with little quantified knowledge of its operations. It should ensure that the ABS collects the data.
More films are being made on low budgets and fewer on higher budgets. It is probable that this is at the expense of the film workers who are expected to do more for less. This includes the composer who is often given an inadequate budget allocation from which all costs of producing the musical soundtrack must be met.
The Music Council thus supports the proposal that payments from the Qualifying Australian Production Expenditure should go only to Australian citizens or permanent residents. Similarly, the Significant Australian Content test should benefit Australians at all levels of production.
The Producer Offset at its present level is probably not sufficient to underpin a viable industry. Support might be enhanced through state funding agencies playing a larger role in providing cashflow facilities.
The Free Trade Agreement with the USA has constrained Australia’s ability to regulate to foster its screen industry. The CER with New Zealand is making some inroads into Australian television production. The negotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership with both the USA and NZ arouses deep concern that Australian cultural sovereignty could be further compromised.
Alterations to Code 4 (Australian Music Content) of the Australian Broadcasting Standard
Submission to Commercial Radio Australia
Prepared by Richard Letts March 19, 2010
Commercial Radio Australia (CRA) is the “self-regulator” for this Code which imposes the obligation on commercial free-to-air radio broadcasters to devote a percentage of the time given to broadcasting music to Australian music. CRA is obliged by the government to review the operation of the Code every three years and report its own proposals and public responses to them to the Australian Communications and Media Authority, which decides on what changes to accept.
CRA has made a proposal outside of the triennial schedule, the effect of which would appear to be to terminate Australian content requirements on free-to-air digital radio, which will be the only free-to-air radio when analogue radio is switched off. The proposal is counter to government’s expressed policy and the purpose of the Code, and to the interests of Australian culture and music stakeholders. Furthermore, the procedures followed by CRA are the cause of great dissatisfaction in the music community. MCA opposes the proposals and with others in the music sector is proposing to the Minister and to ACMA that the review authority be taken from CRA and given to an independent authority.
Negotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement
Letter to the Minister for Trade
Prepared by Richard Letts March 19, 2010
The Minister was reported in the Sydney Morning Herald of March 16 as saying, concerning the negotiation of this agreement: “We approached this on the basis that everything is on the table. No exclusions…” The meaning of this statement is that domestic regulations cannot impose on products and services of a partner country anything not imposed on domestic producers, in the context of international trade. Or course, all agreements have lists of “exclusions” from these provisions. The position of the MCA and the cultural sector generally, here and abroad, is that cultural activity in its entirety should be excluded from the outset. The Minister’s statement is thus of great concern. The letter explains, briefly, why.
Prepared by Lynn Gailey and Richard Letts March 5, 2010
This review is focused on identifying specific areas of Australian Government regulation that are unnecessarily burdensome, complex or redundant or duplicate regulations or the role of regulatory bodies including those in other jurisdictions.
The Music Council strongly believes that whilst compliance with regulatory obligations should not impose undue burdens on business, nonetheless some regulatory regimes are in place to deliver an agreed social good. They may impose a regulatory burden but that is a price paid for living in a just and equitable society.
The submission acknowledges that there is a regulatory burden imposed on television and radio broadcasters by the requirements to broadcast Australian television and music productions. While the industry association for radio broadcasters seems intent on opposing and dismantling its local content requirements, they deliver a public good, ensuring the Australian public has access to Australian music, supporting Australian artists and the Australian record industry, and should be retained.
The Music Council notes the special difficulties facing music businesses, which often are active in more than one state jurisdiction through for instance organising touring, but face an extraordinary lack of regulatory harmonisation. Many are micro, small or medium companies and do not have the resources to understand the compliance requirements across eight state and territory jurisdictions plus the Commonwealth. A table is included giving the blunt facts about disharmony across 23 categories of regulation such as the existence of a code of conduct for child employment in the entertainment industry.
The submission concludes with some comments on the regulation of temporary entry into Australian by artists.
Prepared by Lynn Gailey and Richard Letts March 5, 2010
The submission lays out the basic argument from the cultural sector for the exclusion of culture from free trade agreements. It agrees with Minister Sherry that greater benefit is to be gained from multilateral agreements than from bilateral and regional agreements, given that in negotiation of bilateral agreements Australia can find itself a very unequal negotiating partner with nations the size of the USA or China.
MIt notes that most bilateral agreements are negative list agreements and the severe disadvantages for culture in such agreements as compared with positive list agreements.
The submission gives a brief historical account of agreements back to Menzies’ time and the prevailing attitude that they should not encompass cultural activity. Nevertheless, in the free trade agreement with the USA, the Howard government surrendered significant cultural sovereignty in exchange for doubtful US concessions in agriculture. It now appears that the benefits to Australia from this agreement are minimal and far less than the benefits to the USA.
“The Music Council considers that whatever sectoral interests might be advantaged by negotiating bilateral and regional trade agreements, Australia’s negotiating leverage is always likely to be limited – the result of being a small country with an open economy – and the costs can, as evidenced by the AUSFTA, be considerable. Given the very considerable resources involved with negotiating bilateral and regional agreements, it is to be hoped that if Australia is to pursue this path, it will achieve much greater benefits, and with fewer important concessions, than those achieved from, for instance, the AUSFTA.”
Performance Benchmarking of Australian Business Regulation: Occupational Health and Safety
Submission to the Productivity Commission
Prepared by Lynn Gailey March 1, 2010
The Research Report notes that in 2010, entities operating in multiple jurisdictions can contend with up to “3392 pages of regulation – 1068 from primary legislation and 2324 from formal regulations – and face 282 codes of practice at the state and territory level."
Such complexity invites non-compliance with legislation and regulations that are crucial to the welfare and interests of both employers and employees. The MCA submission observes that the problem is especially acute for music entities which are usually of small to medium size, with limited resources to apply to understanding and compliance, and may be involved in rapid touring across jurisdictions with as little as one day spent in a particular state or territory.
Submission to the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy
Prepared by Lynn Gailey with contributions from Ian Harvey and Richard Letts February 26, 2010
The Music Council agrees with the Minister who, in his foreword to the Green Paper, says that while “[s]pectrum is valuable to potential purchasers … of far greater benefit are the opportunities it can offer to all Australians by providing new services for individuals and businesses”. The Music Council welcomes the Minister’s commitment that:
… there is no ‘either/or’ approach in terms of free-to-air digital television and the digital dividend. The Government is committed to ensuring that the high quality free-to-air digital services that Australians enjoy will continue to be provided.
The transition from analogue to digital offers a once-in-a-generation opportunity, an opportunity that must be seized for the benefit of all Australians.
The Music Council considers that the proposed spectrum stacking should accommodate capacity for the following:
three public free-to-air national broadcasters, with multi-channel capacity, namely the ABC, SBS and NITV;
four free-to-air national commercial broadcasters with multi-channel capacity – allowing for the continued existence of the incumbents and the possibility of a new entrant to drive competition, diversity and audience choice
the continued viability of community broadcasting – television and radio – following analogue switch-off
the needs of digital radio services in regional Australia
allocation of spectrum for the adequate provision of government services including defence services, national security, law enforcement, emergency services, public and community services, health services and education
accommodation of class-licensed uses for wireless audio devices including radio microphones and guitar and keyboard transmitters
reservation of sufficient spectrum for future uses and technological applications either not used or not known at present
As is the case today, and consistent with long-standing bipartisan recognition of the benefits that accrue from access to spectrum for commercial uses, access to digital spectrum must continue to be regulated in a manner consistent with the national interest by way of must carry rules and local content obligations. Further, there should be no distinction made between television and television-like services – regardless of delivery platform, local content and classification regulation and must carry rules should apply equally.
The Music Council does not agree that the commercial free-to-air broadcasters are currently in terminal decline. Rather, they currently remain profitable enterprises. However, the Music Council does recognize the possibility that, in coming years in a dramatically changed environment, it is possible that the financial models now underpinning free-to-air commercial broadcasting might not be able to sustain current levels of Australian content. With that possibility in mind, the Music Council believes that the financial dividend that will accrue to government with the auctioning of spectrum licences could be invested in a manner that might be utilised at some point in the future to offset some of the costs associated with the production of local content if required.
Commercial Free to Air Licence Fee Rebates and Local Content
Letter to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy
Prepared by an alliance of the ACS, ADG, AGSC, ASEG, AWG, MEAA, MCA, SPAA February 21, 2010
The letter raises concerns about a rebate on television broadcasters’ licence fee “to protect Australian content on commercial television” at a time when local content is being shut out of digital free to air television and the Department is reviewing the application of local content standards on the multichannels. Information and discussion is sought.
Content and Access: The future of program standards and captioningrequirements on digital multi-channels
Submission to Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy
Prepared by an alliance of film industry organisations and the Music Council February 18, 2010
The submission calls for local content rules to be placed upon free to air digital television multichannels. It notes that the broadcasters, not now subject to local content requirements, present very minimal levels of Australian content. In return for access to public spectrum, and the recent licence fee rebate, it is reasonable to impose local content obligations upon them..
Submission to the Minister for the Arts, Hon Peter Garrett MP
Prepared by Lynn Gailey and Richard Letts February 12, 2010
The Minister proposed during the last election campaign to introduce new regulations requiring foreign musical acts to include an Australian support act with the purpose of creating more employment and higher profile for Australian musicians. The regulations probably have specially in mind the large scale arena presentations and festivals but also would cover smaller events.
The Minister is now moving to implement his proposal and to that end, issued a discussion paper and invited submissions to discuss the issues it raises. The Music Council supports the intention of the regulations. This submission deals with some of the details especially those raised in the discussion paper.
Letter to Minister re Regulations that are Harming Live Venues in Melbourne
Richard Letts January 20, 2010
Regulations introduced for purposes of controlling crowds and violence in licensed venues in Melbourne are causing the closure of music programs in premises which have no record of such problems. The letter requests the Minister to review the regulations and target them more carefully.
The Minister for the Arts, Peter Garrett, issued an open invitation for submissions to assist in the development of a national cultural policy. This is the MCA’s response.
This is the table of contents in an abbreviated version.
A Definition of ‘Culture’ Is Necessary
An Ethical Basis in Human and Cultural Rights
The Australian Context for Cultural Policy
Role of Government with Regard to Culture
Possible Government Policy Considerations
Achieve excellence
Achieve artistic innovation
Encourage innovation AND sustain the cultural heritage
Achieve equality of access to participation
Achieve equality of access to an effective arts education
Encourage successful participation by youth
Sustain and develop cultural diversity
Sustain and develop Indigenous Australian art and artists
Sustain and develop a diversity of languages and the ability to use them
Provide adequate financial and regulatory support
Foster financial self-reliance in the arts sector
Develop cultural infrastructure
Provide information that supports cultural development
Project Australian culture internationally
Closing statement
Appendix 1: The Whole of Government: Commonwealth Ministries and Their Relevance tothe Music Sector
Appendix 2:A Very Short History of Australian Government Intervention in the Arts
Appendix 3:Cultural Policy Statements from Other Countries
Appendix 4: A Message from Arts Minister Peter Garrett – National Cultural Policy,a national dialogue
Discussion Framework – Towards a National Cultural Policy
Content and access: The future of program standards and captioning requirements on digital television multi-channels
Submission on discussion paper
Prepared by Lynn Gailey January 10, 2010
The Music Council of Australia's submission in response to the Discussion Paper Content and access: The future of program standards and captioning requirements on digital television multi-channels released by the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy in December 2009:
The Music Council considers that the advent of digital broadcasting affords Australia a once in a lifetime opportunity. Scarce spectrum can now be utilised to offer enhanced program choice for audiences. This choice must include increased opportunities to access Australian programs, as well as greater competition in the market. These opportunities should not be wasted...
The music council has responded to a review of the Guidelines for the International Film Co-production Programbeing conducted by Screen Australia.
The Music Council has become aware that there has been some pressure on Screen Australia for the Guidelines to be watered down, a position the Music Council both regrets and opposes. The Music Council considers that the current Guidelines are fair and balanced, recognize the importance of accessing reciprocal benefits, appropriately reflect the cultural underpinning of the Program, provide an effective mechanism for the financing of film and television programs in an increasingly globalised and competitive international market place and sit comfortably within and are complementary to the Government’s matrix of industry support....
The National Curriculum and Strategic Advocacy For Music and the Arts
A paper for the music education community
Richard Letts September 10, 2009
Advocacy to governments on behalf of music education has been, in a sense, unfettered until recently. However, with the decision by the Commonwealth to include the five artforms, dance, drama, media, music and visual arts/design, in the National Curriculum, governments must now consider all five together. There is a need for collaboration and mutual consideration among the artform advocates. The alternative could be public dispute and failure.
A number of national artform and arts education organisations form the alliance, the National Advocates for Arts Education (NAAE). Together, the developed a proposal that the National Curriculum should be written on the basis that throughout the compulsory school years, every school should offer continuous, sequential, developmental education in at least two artforms and rich but not necessarily continuous experiences in the other three.
Some in the music education community are dismayed that this would seem to mean a step back from the aspiration for universal provision of continuous music education. However, the NAAE members do envisage that every artform is free to persuade schools to choose their respective form as one of the two primary arts subjects.
Submission to The Hon Peter Garrett MP, Minister for the Arts
August 29, 2009 Written by Lynn Gailer and Richard Letts
During the 2007 election campaign, now-Minister Garrett announced an initiative to require presenters of tours by foreign artists to engage Australian musicians as opening acts. The initiative has not been implemented and a reason was suggested to the MCA. This letter suggests a way of addressing the obstacle and proceeding to implementation.
Submission to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Written by Lynn Gailey August 25, 2009
This agreement is under negotiation with Brunei Darussalam, Chile, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam and the United States of America. As with the other submissions on Australia's negotiation of international free trade agreements, the Music Council states its opposition to any inclusion of culture. The issue is especially pertinent in this negotiation because Australia already has agreements with New Zealand and the United States which tie the Australian government's hands in supporting Australian culture. The Music Council is strongly opposed to any of the concessions made in either CER or AUSFTA being replicated in new trade agreements.
There is a proposal in this agreement to treat advertising films and recordings as goods rather than services. The USA has used this tactic in negotiation of other agreements to take advantage of the stronger free trade protocols applying to goods under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. MCA opposes the use of this classification. The Music Council is also concerned that the treatment of audiovisual advertising materials is not captured under the Chapter 19 General Exceptions.
A General Exception is made for the Creative Arts:
"...nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent the adoption or enforcement by a Party of measures necessary to protect national works or specific sites of historical or archaeological value, or to support creative arts of national value."
As so often happens in these agreements, an apparently innocuous phrase can be the means to executing a major agenda. Here, Parties to the agreement could be put in the position of having to justify cultural support to anything not demonstrably of "national value" and obviously, there can be endless discussion and delay around the definition of "national value" -- most probably, on previous evidence, at the instigation of the USA. The USA is opposed by most of the world in its application of the free trade agenda to culture. It is unlikely to have its way in multilateral agreements under the WTO and so prosecutes its agenda in a succession of smaller agreements such as this one.
That being said the Music Council supports the provisions that restrict the scope of the Agreement in regard to government procurement, the provisions excluding services in receipt of government subsidy and the provisions contained in Chapter 10 covering intellectual property.
Review of the Entertainment Industry Act 1989, New South Wales
Submission written by Lynn Gailey, with Richard Letts assisting. August 8, 2009
The Music Council responded to an Options Paper prepared by the Better Regulation Office and the Office of Industrial Relations. Although the Music Council concentrates its attention on national rather than state matters, in this case it was considered that the Act is the most advanced in the country, despite its shortcomings, and that revisions to it may be influential in other jurisdictions.
The government considers regulation is necessary in the entertainment industry for three main reasons, namely
· many performers are in a weak bargaining position; · many performers are reluctant to or unable to afford legal remedies; · there are conflicts of interest where a representative acts for both a performer and a venue.
Broadly, the Music Council supports these findings.
The issues addressed in the submission are these:
· Maximum agent fees · Stipulation for written contract if for fees above 10 per cent. · Mandatory use of trust accounts · Requirement to provide financial statements to performers · Requirement for probationary licensee to lodge a bond · Copy of all contracts to be kept · Provision of information to performers about dispute resolutions · Code of ethics with penalties · 12 months for OIR to commence prosecutions · Representative to disclose to performer if also acting for a venue · Financial penalties for breaches · Auditing and inspection powers
Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations (PACER Plus)
Submission to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, July 31, 2009 Submission written by Lynn Gailey and Richard Letts
MCA's ongoing position with regard to international free trade agreements is that culture should be totally excluded from them. In two notable Australian agreements, it has not been: the agreement with the USA (AUSFTA) and with New Zealand (CER). AUSFTA has already precluded Australian from taking some actions in domestic cultural policy. The CER had the spectacular outcome some years ago of New Zealand productions being given classification as Australian productions for the purpose of meeting Australian content requirements on television. In the case of New Zealand, this perhaps is not so worrisome in practice, but imagine if that had been an outcome of the agreement with the USA.
The Music Council submission notes the necessity of avoiding the extension of the cultural provisions of the CER or the agreements between Australia or New Zealand and the USA, to this agreement.
Submission to the Korea FTA Task Force, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Lynn Gailey
July 3, 2009
The submission reiterates the MCA's position, already presented in other policy submissions, that culture should be excluded from all free trade agreements. It describes the special circumstances applying in South Korea, where negotiation of an FTA with the USA led to a halving of the Korean screen quota for local films -- a policy that had nurtured the development of one of the most successful film industries in the world.
Australia's Future Tax System review (the Henry Review)
Submission to theAFTS Secretariate, The Treasury
Lynn Gailey andRichard Letts
May 1, 2009
The review isconsidering reforms to the taxation system. The MCA submission presentsobservations and recommendations on a number of matters affecting musicians andthe music sector.
The submissionnotes that the music sector, regarded as a satellite account (i.e. includingactivities that are recorded by the ABS under non-music categories such asbroadcasting) probably contributes around $7 billion per year to GDP. This is asubstantial contribution and the sector warrants serious consideration.
On the other hand,musicians incomes are low and their contribution to the sector can beencouraged by equitable but sympathetic consideration under the tax system.
The MCA submissionmakes observations and proposals about
income tax averaging'
tax-deductibility of work-related expenses
inconsistencies in rulings
access to child care
the application of the New Start program
superannuation
status as employees or self-employed
tax concessions for donation of musical instruments
Agreement establishing the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area
Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties
Lynn Gailey and Richard Letts April 23, 2009
This submissionreiterates the MCA's basic position that culture should not be on the table ininternational trade agreements.
This is a positivelist agreement, meaning that it covers only matters specifically included inthe agreement. This is in contrast to the more dangerous negative listagreement, such as that with the USA, in which all trade is included unlessspecifically excluded.
The danger in thisagreement was in particular that the terms of the prior Australia-New Zealand(CER) trade agreement, in which culture is totally on the table, would not beextended to ASEAN. If fact, they have not been so extended.
The MCA issatisfied that this agreement does not endanger the Australian government'sprerogative to support Australian culture.
Australian Accession to Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions
MCA submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties
Richard Letts March 5, 2009
The Music Council has made a submission to the Commonwealth Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, making a number of proposals as it considers Australian accession to the UNESCO Convention for the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions.
The MCA was active in the period of gestation of this Convention before it was taken up by UNESCO. The UNESCO General Conference adopted the Convention in 2005, with a vote of 148 to 2 against, and 4 abstentions, among them Australia. The Rudd government takes Australia back to multilateralism and participation in these international treaties.
The Convention was motivated primarily by the need for an international agreement that would give normative support to a nation’s assertion of cultural sovereignty in the negotiation of free trade agreements. If it had existed when Australia was negotiating its “free” trade agreement with the USA, our government might not have been forced to sacrifice its until then unfettered right to support Australian culture.
Signatories to the Convention claim that right. It is a right that the Australian cultural sector, including MCA, strongly supports.
The Convention has many non-binding clauses that encourage support to a diversity of cultural expressions within national borders, and through cross-border cultural exchanges, especially with developing countries.
The Music Council submission argues that accession to the Convention will encourage the Australian government to support among other things, traditional Aboriginal cultures, especially the musical cultures at risk of extinction, and the music of immigrants. In the MCA’s view, the inadequacy of support to these musics has meant a major lost opportunity for the enrichment of Australian culture and the emergence of our own distinctive music.
The Music Council also sees the opportunity for cultural partnerships with neighbouring developing countries, both to assist them in developing their own music sectors and to bring their music and arts to Australian audiences.The submission goes into these issues in some detail.
Submission to the review by Commercial Radio Australia
Written by Dr Richard Letts, with input from Music Council Members Robyn Holmes, Julian Knowles, Stephen Peach and Michael Smellie February 27, 2009
Since 1992, the formerly government-managed regulation of the Australian music quotas on commercial radio has passed into the management of Commercial Radio Australia (CRA), the industry association for commercial radio broadcasters. While the regulations are ostensibly formulated by CRA, in consultation with representatives of national music industry organisations, they must be approved by the Commonwealth's Australian Communication and Media Authority (ACMA). Every few years, CRA is obliged to organise a review of the regulations, Commercial Radio Codes of Practice, including an invitation for comment from the public. Its recommendations must then be submitted to ACMA for approval, or not.
The Music Council responded to this invitation with a submission concerning Code of Practice 4. This is the Code that specifies the amount of Australian music that must be broadcast. It is a somewhat complex code, with a maximum requirement of 25% of music broadcast time or number of tracks for certain genres/formats, reducing in tiered decrements through 20%, 15%, 10% 5% for other formats. Jazz comes in at 5%, a theoretical concept since there is no commercial station with a jazz format. There are also quota requirements for "new music" -- tracks released in the previous 12 months. The quota applies in the period 6.00am to 12 midnight.The presentation by CRA was concerned mainly with its own proposals for change. The main acknowledged changes were a proposal to terminate the existence of AMPCOM, the industry monitoring body in which it shares membership with music industry stakeholders such as ARIA, APRA, and the Musicians' Union, and another to terminate the operation of Code 4 altogether if the present 1% cap on the royalty rates paid by the broadcasters to record companies and performers is removed.
In addition to these acknowledged changes, the CRA also, without acknowledgement, proposed to delete a large amoung of text from the current Code. This has the effect of changing the stated purpose of the regulations, removing CRA's statement of support for Australian music, and deleting definitions such as the time of day requirement and those concerned with the new music regulations, making the latter almost impossible to implement.
The MCA submission gives its reasons for opposing every CRA proposal except one. It also expresses its deep dissatisfaction with the fact that these reviews are placed by the government in the hands of a stakeholder with a deep conflict of interest, and with the actual conduct of the current review by the CRA.
Music Council of Australia submission to the Commonwealth review of the ABC and SBS
Principal author: Dr Shane Homan December 2008
The review was intended in particular to address the future of the public broadcasters as we enter an era of new digital platforms. It published a discussion paper to guide the thinking of those who intended to make submissions. This discussion paper set forth a number of key objectives for public broadcasting.
The ABC Charter lists three main functions for the organisation. One of these three is "to encourage and promote the musical, dramatic and other performing arts in Australia". The MCA discovered that the discussion paper did not address this clause excepting for the production of Australian television drama, and that the word "music" did not appear even once.
The MCA submission focuses in particular on the role of the public broadcasters in producing and broadcasting music programs. While the attention of the discussion paper and of debate generally around broadcasting is heavily concentrated around the audiovisual and television, the MCA presses the case for radio as the most important vehicle for broadcast or other dissemination of music.
It recommends increased funding to both networks for the production and broadcasting of music and in the case of SBS, proposes major initiatives in locally created and performed world music, consistent with its multicultural purpose. SBS appears to have no local content objectives and should establish them. The MCA recommends increased broadcasting of live performances, noting their attractiveness to audiences.
It proposes specific funding to both broadcasters for the expansion of digitised archives of musical content of historic significance. It notes that the public broadcasters have a special opportunity to encourage and promote music production in regional centres, offering connections with national and indeed international audiences.
Other recommendations concern outside contracting, establishing creative partnerships with education authorities, mentorships, a commitment to artistic as well as technological innovation, and international promotion through Radio Australia and other means.
Submission to the Commonwealth Inquiry for a National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care
Dr Peter de Vries October 2008
The Music Council of Australia has taken a very stronginterest in issues concerning music education and was partly responsible forthe instigation of the Commonwealth's National Review of School Music Educationof 2005 and developments since.
On September 5, the Council produced a summit for the musicsector, Australian Musical Futures: Towards 2020. 100 leaders from the sectormet for a full day of discussion. Among the highest priorities in its reportwas this recommendation:
Music training should be a requirement for all earlychildhood teachers and provision of such training should be added to theobjectives following from the National Review of School Music Education.
This submission focuses on the provision of music in earlychildhood education in Australia.The submission provides:
background about the current provision of music education in Australian early childhood education settings
a rationale for the inclusion of music in early childhood education programs
a brief outline of what quality musical experiences for children in early childhood settings might look like
two core recommendations for improving the provision of music education in early childhood education.
The Music Council believes there is a simple solution tobringing to young children the great benefits following on from development oftheir musical (and consequently, other) abilities: provide a sufficienttraining in music and music teaching to all early childhood teachers. Teachersequipped with those skills would be bound to bring them to the children becauseboth teacher and children love and benefit from music making.
There are no additional financial implications. Unlike thesituation for primary and secondary schools, there are no additional costs ininclusion of a music program in the daily life of the early childhood centre.
