Government's Role in the Cultural Sector: a survey of the issues
Minister | Foreword | Introduction | Involvement | Why Involved? | Policy | Patron | Conclusion | Appendix

Foreword

1.1

This paper was prepared to support the wish of successive Ministers of Cultural Affairs to reassess government’s involvement in the cultural sector. Government’s involvement has developed in a rather haphazard fashion over many decades, and is now scattered among a variety of portfolios, departments and agencies - some of which have other, non-cultural priorities.

1.2

Preliminary work on the paper began during the term as Minister of Cultural Affairs of Hon Christine Fletcher, who secured the former Prime Minister’s approval for a "stock-take" of government’s interventions in the sector. In January 1998, Ms Fletcher’s successor, Hon Simon Upton, determined that, in addition to this stocktaking role, the paper should give an historical account of cultural policy developments and attempt to show the rationale that, often unexpressed, can be shown to have prompted them. It was also agreed that the paper would not return to first principles. That is, it would start from the assumption that central government has a role to play in the cultural sector. It would examine the reasons for government’s involvement and, briefly and succinctly, assess its performance.

1.3

A full draft of the paper was first developed in June 1998. At that time, the problem of fragmentation highlighted by the paper prompted the current machinery of government review, which is looking at the diverse departmental arrangements for the cultural sector. In summary form, the paper has been used as a background document for this review.

1.4

The paper discusses the reasons why government may be considered to have a role to play in the sector and infers a set of outcomes that may be sought by cultural policy. It then surveys the government’s current involvements - as policy-maker, as patron, as guardian, and as the provider of education - to note strengths and weaknesses, gaps and anomalies. The object is to provide a basis for enhancing the effectiveness of these involvements by identifying the key policy issues worthy of further exploration. These issues will be used to advise the Minister of Cultural Affairs on a strategic policy programme for government’s involvement in the cultural sector.

1.5

The paper is not a policy framework or "manual": it does not provide criteria that will tell government when and how to intervene. Rather, it identifies some key problems and issues.

1.6

It is important to note that the paper is not a statement of government policy. It is this Ministry’s advice to its own Minister. It therefore presents our own view of why government is involved in the cultural sector, and of the issues affecting its performance. There are alternative views on what the government’s role should be. In presenting our own, we have not attempted to present these other views. It should be noted, however, that in drafting the paper the Ministry collaborated with Te Puni Kokiri. The aim of this collaboration was to ensure that the paper addresses the government’s performance in giving effect to the Treaty of Waitangi, and in particular the extent to which cultural policy is enabling Maori care and control of the heritage that makes up a distinct Maori cultural identity.

1.7

The Ministry also wishes to record its gratitude to other departments and agencies that have taken the time to comment on the accuracy, fairness and scope of the paper. We have paid careful attention to these comments, and the paper is the better for it.

1.8

The paper is being published to meet the expectations of those who have expressed an interest in seeing it, and, as the machinery of government review continues, to provide an insight into the views of the ministry charged with advising government on its cultural policy role. Whatever new arrangements emerge, the aim of this review is to enhance government’s capacity to develop strategic policy for its cultural responsibilities. We expect that this paper will continue to prove useful as a summary of the issues that such future policy-making must address.

Martin Matthews
Acting Chief Executive
Ministry of Cultural Affairs

December 1998