Draft Program Guidelines
Comments received Thursday 30 October
From Paul Andersen
Hi folks, I'm an Australian director and writer who submitted
suggestions to the 2020 summit. It seems like few of these
suggestions have made their way to the draft guidelines (with the
exception of expanded slate / infrastructure funding for production
companies, and mentoring fellowships).
It's a shame that in the attempt to create a 'globally innovative'
film industry, it is proposed to remove funding from less experienced
practitioners, the proven mavericks and innovators. In my view,
Screen Australia ought to embrace and expand upon the development role
of the former AFC, so that our industry develops from the grass roots
I am sending you my original set of suggestions (attached) in the hope
that some of them may be addressed before the guidelines are
finalised. In my opinion the scope of the draft guidelines needs to
be expanded. Both the definition of what can constitute 'development'
and the ways in which the organisation may facilitate production may
be diversified. This need not mean more funds to more areas, rather a
re-allocation of more public support to newcomers, and more incentives
for private sector involvement for the more experienced.
It's my view that Screen Australia needs to be in the business of
public-private partnerships (such as matched funding), especially in a
climate of dwindling public monies. Ultimately, Screen Australia
should facilitate the growth of a studio system, engaging directly
with the private sector and the market, rather than acting as a
Please refer to the dot points in the attached document. I hope they
Download Paul Andersen 2020 PDF