The digital revolution is upon us.

Everyday we can find almost anything we want with the touch of a button.

But is the modern way, always the best way?

Melissa Wilkinson looks at the world of comic books and its integration into the Apple phenomenon.

By Josh Kenworthy | Melbourne editor

Hazelwood Power station in Victoria. Image: Jenny Jägerhorn

The Victorian government’s plan to shut down Hazelwood Power Station, outlined in its Climate Change White Paper, has been welcomed by unions in the area.

The Gippsland Trades and Labour Council (GTLC) Secretary/Treasurer, John Parker said he was pleased with the white paper because it gave the industry enough notice to begin shifting to new industries.

“We’ve been saying to the government, ‘we want to know the truth and we want to know your best estimate of what’s going to happen’.”

Parker said, “The employer’s association have been saying for quite a while, behind the scenes, that by 2020 with a carbon trading scheme two of the power stations will probably be gone. And what we’ve said [to the government] is that we need… to be able to do that transition now.”

He also described the closure as a “brave call” by state government to give the early notice which is in stark contrast to the thousands of people left unemployed during the privatisations of the Kennett era.

GTLC Assistant Secretary, Steve Dodd, said it is now important that the government “consult the community and the unions about setting up new jobs for the people to run into.”

According to Parker, the average age of Hazelwood workers is 55 so it is expected that retirement will help with phasing out of Hazelwood while the rest of Gippsland’s skilled work force, mostly working in the power industry, will need to transfer to new industries like solar, construction, wind or dairy.

The white paper, released on Monday, outlines plans to shut down one quarter of Hazelwood Power Station by 2014 and to reduce carbon emissions by 20 per cent of 2000 levels by 2020.

Environment Victoria (EV) said the emissions target showed strong leadership.

“Victoria’s new target is a strong leadership move that is head and shoulders above any other state or national emissions reduction target in Australia. It is in stark contrast to the weak targets and lack of policy from both the Federal ALP and Coalition,” EV chief executive, Kelly O’Shanassy said.

“While the science tells us we need to go further than a 20 percent reduction in emissions by 2020, the Premier is building a bridge between what we are currently doing about climate change in Australia and what we need to be doing,” she said.

Josh Kenworthy is a student currently at Monash University in Melbourne.

Related articles

Hundreds protest over Rudd’s backflip
Climate protesters planning new protests
The grimy valley struggles on

By Rita Mu

Prescribing antibiotics for the common cold can cause unwanted side effects. Image: Adrienne

Doctors are still prescribing antibiotics for the common cold, despite wide acceptance and research showing that the drugs have no effect on viral infections.

An estimated 2.7 million prescriptions for antibiotics were issued for the common cold in 2008-09, an increase of 600,000 prescriptions from 2006-07, according to the Bettering Evaluation And Care of Health (BEACH) program.

BEACH is a continuous national study on the clinical activities in general practice.

The figure for 2008-09 match the numbers from a decade ago when antibiotic prescriptions a hit a record high of 2.7 million for the first time.

According to National Prescribing Service ‘s (NPS) acting chief executive, Karen Kaye, antibiotics should be used to treat only bacterial infections and were ‘‘ineffective’’ against viral infections such as the cold.

‘‘Common colds and the increasing number of strains of influenza are viral infections, so antibiotics won’t help these conditions get better any quicker,’’ she said.

‘‘Antibiotics are not usually specified to treat sore throats or acute coughs, even if bacteria are the cause.”

The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners president, Dr Chris Mitchell said antibiotics had ‘‘no benefit’’ for the common cold and that there was ‘‘no justification’’ for GPs to continue prescribing antibiotics to patients.

‘‘Doctors need to be cautious about the use of antibiotics,’’ he said.

“Prescribing antibiotics for the wrong reasons exposes people to unnecessary risks and side effects such as stomach pains and diarrhoea.”

Pressure from patients and concerns that patients could be at a higher risk of developing bacterial infections such as pneumonia or meningitis were some reasons GPs prescribed antibiotics, said Dr Mitchell.

‘‘Sometimes GPs may prescribe antibiotics but advise patients not to use them unless symptoms are not settling.’’

Dr Mitchell said the public needed more education about antibiotics and that the common cold could be treated without drugs.

‘‘Rest, washing your hands frequently and social distancing can be helpful [to treat the cold].’’

Kaye said the unnecessary use of antibiotics was leading to a ‘‘global problem of antibiotic resistance.’’

The NPS estimates more than three million antibiotic prescriptions are wasted on viral infections, and 7000 deaths are caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria each year in Australia.

Despite being only made of plastic and recyclable material, the Plastiki catamaran survived its four month ocean voyage to land in Sydney with a rousing call to end plastic pollution in the world’s oceans, Nick Evershed reports.

The Victorian Government has taken steps in the battle of the bulge to try and make consumers more aware about the food they are eating. Nastasia Campanella reports.

Would you read nutritional labels on fast foods? Image: teampeaks

The Brumby Government have announced that nutritional information would have to be listed on the menus of fast food outlets.

“We are taking action to tackle the obesity epidemic in Australia and are driving significant change to address diabetes and improve health and well-being,” said John Brumby, Premier of Victoria.

The scheme will be applicable to businesses with more than 200 franchises nationally or more than 50 Victorian outlets, whose primary service is to serve prepared food and drinks.

The initiative, to be rolled out in 2012, is the first in Australia and is a scheme already successful in America and Scotland.

Victoria’s Health Minister, Daniel Andrews, said rates of diabetes fueled by an unhealthy lifestyle and being over-weight were high.

“If we maintain current diabetes incidence rates, more than a third of our population would develop diabetes within their life time and in Australia there would be an additional one million cases of diabetes by the year 2025,” said Andrews.

“We are concerned about health in the community and believe serious and substantial change is required over the next 10 years.”

Professor Ian Olver – head of the Australian Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance congratulated the Brumby Government on the move.

He said the initiative should help Australian’s make informed decisions about what they eat and would help tackle growing rates of obesity.

“I don’t have official statistics for how many people eat out on a weekly basis, but I do know that food eaten away from home accounts for a growing proportion of our diet,” Professor Olver said.

“An initiative like this was set up in the US years ago and has made a significant difference.”

However, Dr Barbara Mullan from Sydney University’s School of Psychology, said the scheme wouldn’t necessarily change consumers eating habits.

“If people understand the [traffic-light] system used on food labels like the ones used in the UK, eating habits would be affected, but this is based on chance,” she said.

“If people are motivated to make healthier choices at the time of purchasing their foods and can understand the information provided then they are more likely to choose healthy options over unhealthy ones.”

Professor Olver said the move would benefit food outlets if they took the right approach.

“Nutritional labeling will also provide incentives for fast food outlets to increase their range of healthier options and reformulate products to lower kilojoule [calorie] counts,” he said.

Dr Mullans agreed.

“If the outlets suffer a down turn in business then they’ll certainly offer healthier choices,” she said.

McDonalds welcomes the government's initiative. Image: Kici

McDonalds Australia is one of the outlets on board with the program.

A spokesperson from the company said they were only too happy to be part of the initiative.

“Nutrition information has always been available in our restaurants through labels on packaging and fact sheets on our website.”

“We agree the public should be provided with this information so they can make their choices about what to eat.”

The spokesperson also said McDonalds Australia welcomed the move.

“We’re glad for the opportunity to discuss the topic of nutrition labeling with the State Government and relevant health professionals.”

Professor Olver is calling on other states across Australia to get on board with the initiative.

“Premier Brumby’s initiative applies only to the larger fast food chains, but it still represents a major milestone for Australia,” he said.

“It must become a stepping-stone towards a more comprehensive national scheme and towards further initiatives to curb Australia’s escalating rates of obesity.”

Professor Olver said obesity played a part in increased risks of diseases like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, kidney disease and some cancers.

“With two out of three adults and one in four children in Australia now overweight or obese, we need to do everything we can to help Australian’s achieve and maintain a healthy weight.”

Professor Olver is also the head of the Cancer Council in Australia.

People are claiming that Banksy’s new film is purportedly a fake, but this is missing the point. Neda Vanovac writes.

Graffiti, is it art? Image: Leonski

British graffiti artist Banksy’s documentary Exit Through The Gift Shop recently screened at the Sydney Film Festival to riotous laughter and applause. A light-hearted romp through the graffiti underground, the film tracks well-known street artists as they made their mark on the urban landscape.

However, some critics, hip to Banksy’s tricks, are denouncing the documentary as a fake. The real question is, who cares?

The film follows a charmingly bumbling Frenchman, Thierry Guetta, through the nighttime cityscapes first in LA and then around the world as he adoringly films his graffiti artist idols. Finally meeting Banksy, his “last piece of the puzzle”, Guetta manages to make himself a seemingly indisposable recorder of events.

The story then turns around as it becomes apparent that Guetta might have the raw footage but no talent for stringing it together. Banksy tells him to put on an art show, and the resulting extravaganza sees the creation of Mr Brain Wash, or MBW, who seemingly rises out of nothing to put on a show in LA of derivative pop cultural artworks heavily referencing Andy Warhol and Banksy himself, and totally lacking in any originality. It is a raging success.

The movie’s detractors have claimed that the film is one big prank, with Guetta in on the joke and Banksy directing him to pose as a street art desperado, that, as Fast Company’s Alissa Walker says, “[manufactures] a brand new persona that both celebrates and criticizes the over-commercialization of street art.”

But that’s the whole point. If the film is eventually revealed to be a hoax, then that makes it all the better.

Banksy has always been a polarising figure, determined to poke fun at both the establishment and those who think of themselves as anti-establishment; consumer culture and those that are desperate to be seen as aligned with Banksy’s politics.

But Banksy is on no one’s side, and his ever-shifting agenda means that he can keep everyone feeling off-balance. More than anything, Banksy’s work exists to reflect society with a sense of humour.

He has managed to maintain his anonymity since his work began appearing around London in 1993; no mean feat, considering that his works can sell for half a million dollars. In the film, he is shown as a shadowy hooded figure, his voice distorted. He is filmed from behind or wearing masks, hats and fake beards as he goes about his work. And yet he has become the most famous street artist in the world.

Confronting and meaningful. Image: Richard Cocks

Banksy’ aesthetic is simple: he uses stencils to create clean graphic lines that allow him to “socially cartoon”, making his statement clear and easy-to-read.

And what a statement it is: balaclava-ed protesters throwing a bunch of flowers in place of a Molotov cocktail; kissing policemen; a caveman carrying a tray of fast food; John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson’s Pulp Fiction characters pointing bananas rather than guns; a Buckingham palace guard urinating against a wall; two rats standing as nightclub doormen at a tiny door in the wall with a red carpet; a rat dressed in a suit with a briefcase, ‘let them eat crack’ written behind him; a dove wearing a flak jacket with a scope trained on its chest; a man dangling naked from a window sill while inside, a clothed man looks out accusingly, a worried-looking underwear-clad woman standing behind him.

In 2005, Banksy travelled to Gaza and painted a series of trompe l’oeil paintings along the wall. The image detailed children building sandcastles with part of the wall torn away to reveal an island paradise; a small girl frisking a soldier; and a ladder disappearing over the top of the barbed wire.

For the average person, there is nothing arty or glamorous in graffiti, no higher messages of rebellion against authority or the artistic expression to be gleaned.

“Just mess that has to be cleaned up by someone,” writes Sydney Morning Herald’s Charles Purcell, as he equates Banksy with crudely-sprayed phalluses and profanity. Last month, Purcell wrote an ignorant, provocative article about graffiti that both inflamed aficionados and was supported by those who consider it to be vandalism.

“Note to Banksy: graffiti is not art, it is vandalism,” he ends, on a note of supreme self-satisfaction.

This, again, completely misses the point.

Banksy himself has repeatedly reflected on the irony of his work being embraced by the art community, which he has called “the biggest joke…It’s a rest home for the overprivileged, the pretentious, and the weak.”

He is resistant to mainstream art, telling The New Yorker, “I don’t think art is much of a spectator sport these days. I don’t know how the art world gets away with it, it’s not like you hear songs on the radio that are just a mess of noise and then the DJ says, ‘If you read the thesis that comes with this, it would make more sense.’”

Banksy's rats represent the oppressed and downtrodden. Image: Trois Tetes

He is a passionate defender of returning jurisdiction of the streets to its citizens. He often paints rats and monkeys as taking over the world. To Banksy, the rat is the ideal totem of the downtrodden and the oppressed.

“I’d been painting rats for three years before someone said “that’s a clever anagram of art” and I had to pretend I’d known that all along,” he wrote in his book Wall and Piece.

His argument for the validity and necessity of graffiti is simple:

“[It’s] one of the more honest art forms available. There is no elitism or hype, it exhibits on the best walls a town has to offer, and nobody is put off by the price of admission.

“The people who run our cities don’t understand graffiti because they think that nothing has the right to exist unless it makes a profit, which makes their opinion worthless.

“The people who truly deface our neighbourhoods are the companies that scrawl giant slogans across buildings and buses trying to make us feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff. They expect to be able to shout their message in your face from every available surface but you’re never allowed to answer back. … The wall is the weapon of choice.”

Graffiti, as an art form, has raised many unanswered questions about the ownership of public space.

The eternal dance between graffiti artists and the law continues, with artists quickly creating ephemeral images which people may or may not even see before they are scrubbed off and painted over.

As The New Yorker observed, “graffiti aficionados like to say that the form is as ancient as cave drawing.”

For every Charles Purcell that refuses to attribute any value to the form, there are hundreds of graffiti artists showing him how little they care about his precarious perch from where he has crowned himself arbiter of public art and taste.

Why not give the everyday man and woman a say? Banksy has proven, and he is just one of many, that graffiti can be poignant, witty, and convey a message all at once. It belongs to everyone.

“Any advertisement in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it is yours. It belongs to you. It’s yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head,” he writes in Wall and Piece.

The irony is that the inevitable rise of the graffiti counterculture has been embraced by the same people Banksy has been lampooning. He couldn’t sell his works for $500,000 without the support of mainstream art, no matter how much he might despise them.

This is exactly why Exit Through The Gift Shop is a triumph. It demonstrates the willingness of society to eat up whatever is deemed ‘cool’ no matter how ridiculous. The commodification and mainstreaming of the street art subculture is right there for us all to watch unfold.

Whether the film is real or a hoax, its message remains the same and the joke is on us. We’re welcome to share the laughs, if we can spot the punchline.

Kylie Beale | Melbourne, Australia

Powering Australia another way. Image: Ian Britton

Guy Abrahams is a former solicitor and art gallery director turned environmental activist. As well as completing his Environmental Masters at Melbourne University, Abrahams spends much of his time spruiking his climate change message to community groups around Victoria. He does this as part of the 3,000+ international cohort of volunteers, trained by Al Gore trained following the success of An Inconvenient Truth.

Audience members can’t help but be drawn in by Abrahams’ obvious passion. The prevailing message that lingers in the audiences’ minds is just how far behind other countries Australia really is with regards to the development of renewable energies.

At a meeting in Melbourne, Abrahams raised his concerns. “In Australia our solar resources are absolutely enormous, countries like Germany which are now far advanced in their implementation of solar power, they’re up in the fog in Northern Europe. They look down at Australia and say ‘What are you doing?’ or ‘Why aren’t you doing anything?’”

Matthew Wright of Beyond Zero Emissions (BZE), an activist group lobbying for renewable energy, agrees. “Australia has fallen far short of the world’s leading economies.” Wright says fossil fuel industries “Can’t do” campaign is holding Australia back by “misrepresent(ing) renewable energy as not being able to run in a modern economy.”

According to BZE, Germany installed a “massive” 4000 megawatts of photovoltaic modules in 2009 and are expected to exceed this in 2010. Spain is also ahead of Australia, installing over 2500 Megawatts in 2008. Australia “should already be installing 1000 Megawatts of photovoltaic modules per annum and growing each year,” says Wright.

But Australia has fallen short of this target.

Abraham’s and Wright’s views are echoed throughout the business world, the public service and politics. One of BZE’s key objectives is to build a large network of people from the government, business and education sectors to combat the misinformation being communicated to the public by the fossil fuel industry.

“Once we have hundreds of thousands of Australians working hard for a 100 per cent doable, 100 per cent renewable economy…people power will have its way and this will involve the dirty future being cleaned up and the clean future being forced through,” says Wright.

But the clean future Wright and his team dream of comes at a cost.

Sustainability Victoria’s CEO Anita Roper admits that some technology, like solar PV systems, are not affordable for low-income households due to the upfront costs faced. Although some have the desire to reduce their carbon footprint, they don’t necessarily have the means.

Erik Zimmerman is one industry leader trying to make “going green” affordable.

Previously Head of Learning and Development for ANZ Bank, Zimmerman stumbled upon a documentary in 2006 at a film festival. After watching A Crude Awakening: The Oil Crash, a film about society’s addiction to oil, he was inspired. Taking a great personal risk to try and make a difference, Zimmerman took out a second mortgage on his home to fund his project, EKO Energy.

Zimmerman’s solar energy company, came to life later in 2006 when Australia’s solar installations sat at an approximate 1500 per year. Zimmerman estimates that this figure has increased by a substantial 38 times from its beginning to 2009, with an estimated 47,000 solar installations accounted for last year. EKO Energy was responsible for one in five of every solar installation in Victoria in 2009.

“My aim was to put as many [solar panels] on roofs as I could. I really, passionately believe in this idea of an eco-community,” said Zimmerman in an address to the audience at an EKO Energy Community launches.

“What we’re trying to do is bring renewable energy within reach of every home, every school, every business and every community and what I really want to see one day is systems on every roof.”

Wright points out that the cost of photovoltaic modules has “fallen by half in the last 18 months,” resulting in the expansion of the solar industry in Australia. Despite this positive expansion, Australia is considered to be far behind where it ought to be.

Member of German Parliament Hans-Josef Fell is largely responsible for the German Renewable Energy legislation and framework of the very successful solar feed-in tariffs, which have now been adopted in NSW.

In 2005, the share of renewable energy in the gross amount of electricity for Germany was 9.3%. In 2009 it was 16.1%. By 2020 Germany aims to source 50% of their electricity from renewable energy sources, and 100% by 2030 – a big step up on Australia’s pitiful comparison of 5% from solar powered and 20% wind powered energy by 2020.

Fell says that with global mass production, renewable energy technology will become increasingly cheaper and that national leadership is needed to see it take off.

“Renewable energies would be the most decisive contribution to Global Climate protection,” he says.

“It is also necessary to identify those solutions which are not real solutions at all and to end political support for them. These include in particular the use of nuclear power and reliance on so-called carbon-free coal power stations using CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) technology,” says Fell.

BZE is promoting an ambitious Zero Carbon Australia 2020 project, which is a “costed, detailed blueprint” of Australia’s transition to zero-emissions in the next ten years. The plan focuses on using proven and available technology to accomplish its zero-carbon goal in a bid to dissolve beliefs that renewable energy is simply not a viable option.

Wright suggests that overall, Australia needs “a shift in national imperative to a clean renewable energy future.”

He says, “When the public understand the facts on global commercially available solar technology and then have the confidence to argue for what they want.”

Kylie Beale is a student currently at Monash University in Melbourne.

Gym memberships will be under the microscope with the launch of the Unfair Contract Terms legislation. Jessica Black reports.

Convoluted gym exit rules will be targeted by the new legislation, which is in effect as of 1 July. Image: LocalFitness.com.au

Unfair gym membership contracts and exit conditions are under scrutiny under the Unfair Contract Terms legislation which came into place on July 1.

The legislation aims to protect consumers from contracts which are deemed unfair, whilst also taking into account the clarity of the clauses in “terms and conditions” contracts.

Spokesperson for Choice Consumer Magazine, Brad Schmitt, says that problems arising from contract clauses have been a long-standing characteristic of gym memberships.

“The gym industry has a history of using emotive and often aggressive tactics to recruit new members, though by far the most common complaints have been about the tortuous exit rules they impose.”

Worldwide health operator Fitness First made waves last year when consumer complaints brought to light the difficulty members underwent whilst terminating their membership.

Rules were changed to allow for cancellations to be made over the phone, voiding the previous requirement that they be made at the gym in person. However, it seems that the amendment is yet to be applied across the board by the gym, which plans to expand to 100 outlets in Australia.

Having been asked to come onto the gym premises to perform the cancellation in person earlier this year, Erica Budd, 21, was presented with an additional step when it was confirmed that not she, but the credit card holder (her mother) would have to terminate the membership.

“About a week after that my mum told me that they were still taking money from the account, so that’s when I ended going in one night with my boyfriend to cancel the membership once and for all,” she says.

“They then got frustrated and a little scared with me and my boyfriend, and printed some piece of paper out to show me that the lady on the phone told me that there were two more payments to go before it was to be cancelled. It wasn’t the lady I (initially) talked to.”

Fitness First’s Marketing Director Andy Mallinson said Fitness First has nothing to worry about with the legislation changes, however, he conceded that the complaints detailed in this article did ring alarm bells.

Simplifying the termination process has been an important part of the changes which have been underway for the past 18 months. Mallinson has been working for the gym company for this same period.

“I’m the first to put up my hand and say that actually our reputation around cancellation has been very poor in the past. One of the reasons I joined this business was to help change that and to make it more of a member-centric business, and I think in the last 18 months we’ve absolutely done that.”

Something the gym has taken into particular consideration is the effectiveness of communication between its headquarters to individual branches and staff.

He Chenweng is another former Fitness First member who was forced to physically go into the gym after trying to cancel over the phone. After failing to cancel her membership within the one week trial period, she found herself paying full membership fees.

“Nobody actually asked me or [texted] me [to say] that I automatically joined in the Fitness First, until I found out they get the money from my account every week even though I didn’t go there once,” she says.

To Schmitt, this serves as a reminder to consumers to stay on the alert.

“Last year Fitness First took steps to address these criticisms, so it is disappointing to hear complaints of this nature are ongoing and the onus remains on consumers to know their rights.”

“If you want to terminate your membership once you are out of a contracted period, we suggest cancelling your direct debit with your bank immediately,” he says.

Other complaints have also come to light, which point to issues besides contract termination.

Sophie Gray, 19, had had operations to both her feet when she entered into a contract with Fitness First to only use its pool in 2009.

Presented with a bill for use of all facilities, Sophie was told they had no proof she had not taken advantage of general use equipment.

“After showing proof to them that I couldn’t have been using anything of the other equipment – because I was still on crutches and couldn’t even walk on my own – they refunded me the money, which was great, but I won’t ever be using Fitness First again from all the fuss and misunderstanding,” she says.

University of Technology Sydney Law lecturer David Thorpe said that longer-term contracts might well have been put in place by gyms looking to cover the cost of a high drop-out rate.

“Gym owners appear well aware that the initial anticipation coming with membership is soon confronted with the reality of hard work. A long-term contract is the means of avoiding an inevitable loss known to follow the human disinclination to train hard,” he says.

“Where a consumer, for bona fide reasons, indicates his or her wish to terminate the contract, a simple and practical method terminating payment at the same time needs to be provided in the legislation – it appears not to be. A small loss the consumer might be happy enough to bear is converted into a continuing financial imposition.”

Mallinson stressed that Fitness First had only recently turned its focus to the naturally “seasonal” nature of gym membership, and had not previously taken it into consideration.

This has led to changes around the “incentivisation of the membership base” (the number of joiners or leavers to and from the branch), whereby individual staff will no longer be able to block a member’s cancellation of their membership, nor will there be a fallout for that staff member.

“The processes that we have now put in place means that the impact of that [the membership base data] is far, far less because if a member wants to leave, a member wants to leave, so it’s impossible for a member of staff to actually change that so you can’t affect someone’s commission based on that,” he said.

However “incentivisation” does remain.

To Thorpe, the balance between consumer and business rights is a delicate one.

“Businesses, such as gyms, are entitled under the legislation to protect their legitimate business interests – this includes taking account of the business’s cost structure and the mitigation of risk; interests which may well legitimise contracts of a few weeks’ duration but probably not extending over a few months,” says Mallinson.

“The difficulty the legislature faces is to protect honest businesses from dishonest consumers whilst protecting honest consumers from exploitative businesses.”

When presented with the above scenarios, spokesperson for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), Lin Enright, says the organisation was unable to comment on individual cases or contracts.

“The ACCC will be seeking compliance with the UCT provisions through a range of measures, including the review of standard form consumer contracts where consumer harm is evident. Ultimately, however, the ACCC cannot endorse or ‘approve’ a term in a standard consumer contract.”

Related articles – Protection against the fine print

A recent survey suggests Australians were still willing to dig into their pockets to support the arts during the economic downturn. Carrie Fellner reports.

Australians were willing to dig into their pockets to support the arts during the GFC. Image: Steve Rhode

Many Australians tightened their money belts during the global financial crisis, but a recent survey suggests Australians were still willing to dig into their pockets to support the arts.

The report released this month by the Australia Business Arts Foundation (AbaF), found that private support for the arts rose by more than $8 million in the 2008-2009 financial year.

“Private support for the arts appears to remain healthy despite the economic downturn,” said Jane Haley, chief executive officer at the AbaF.

“Most businesses were committed to maintaining relationships with arts organisations even if they were unable to do so at the previous financial value.”

The survey tracked the value of private support – consisting of both corporate sponsorship and individual philanthropic donations – to 700 Australian arts organisations.

The survey found that overall private support for the arts increased by four per cent from 2007.

Corporate sponsorship, which had been predicted to fall, rose by almost 2 percent to $100.7 million. Philanthropic donations rose to $111.4 million, an increase of 6 percent.

Haley said the results were not surprising.

“Many arts companies in Australia have built robust relationships with corporate partners which make them more resilient in times of economic challenge.

“During the downturn, business wanted to keep partnerships going and sought other ways to provide benefits to the arts organisations,” she said.

The Australia Major Performing Arts Group (AMPAG) also released its annual survey of corporate sponsorship and private donations this month.

However, unlike the AbaF’s report, AMPAG’s earnings from sponsorship, private donations and fundraising events declined by $100,000, or 0.3 per cent, in 2009.

“Overall, it was quite a good result for the end of the year,” said Susan Donnelly, executive director at AMPAG.

“The report reflected some of the anecdotal information we’d received from the companies which was that while people individually were still giving money, that the level of donations was going down slightly.”

She said private support is vital to the survival and growth of arts organisations.

“These days government funding doesn’t keep pace with inflation rates and companies only ever get a proportion of their funds from government and then they have to get the rest from private sources. This includes box offices, but also includes things like corporate sponsorship and philanthropy. All companies work upon a mixed income model.”

Western Australian MLC, Linda Savage has been working in the community to try and secure more funding for the arts. She recently organised a group of 40 women to donate $1000 each to the local theatre, The Black Swan.

Savage says she is concerned that the WA’s state government is failing to contribute its fair share to the arts.

“My concern is that the state government is lagging behind and failing to set an example despite our booming economy.

“As important as it is to do fundraising the way I did, that is no substitute for adequate funding from the government,” she said.

Many small and medium sized organisations depend on private funding for their survival.

Many organisations depend on private funding to survive. Image: Mark Kamin

Brendan Day is the development manager of Sydney Dance Company. He says the company would not be alive without private contributions.

“Without our partners program and the generosity of our individual donors we actually wouldn’t be functioning as a company,” he said.

Day said some of their donors support multiple organisations.

“A lot of our high level donors are actually donors to the majority of arts companies in Australia, in Sydney.

“A lot of our big donors donate to the opera, to the ballet, to the symphony, to the dance company, to the theatre. So there’s very much a big following of generous people in Sydney.”

Simon Mordant is the joint chief executive of corporate advisory firm Greenhill Caliburn and is a strong supporter of the arts in Sydney.

He has run a number of arts based scholarships at Cranbrook and supported the education program at Sydney Theatre Company. In May this year his family pledged $15 million to the redevelopment of the Museum of Contemporary Art.

“If you believe that the community you live in should be a creative and vibrant community then the arts are central to that – the visual arts, the performing arts. We have a very firm belief that we should leave the community in a better shape than we found it in when we arrived. And giving back something that we feel very strongly and passionately about – that’s what drives us,” he said.

“But also I think if you want world class institutions then you better have world class infrastructure. You can’t have world class museums if you don’t have the buildings and the infrastructure to provide the programs that you want.”

But Donnelly says there may be some other reasons why people are so willing to donate to the arts.

“I think Australians are financially better off overall, despite the GFC, and they’re now at a level of sophistication whereby they want to share some of their wealth.

“The other thing I find interesting is that Australians tend to not be such church-going people as they used to be. Whereas traditionally people would give money at churches when the plate was handed around, now they tend to give money in other ways.”

Doyle also adds that not-for-profit organisations have changed their approach to fundraising and have benefited from the result.

“Whereas before, say ten or even twenty years ago it was considered quite rude in Australian culture to ask for money.

“I think there’s more of an openness now, for people to say: ‘Will you help us?’ And generally, people like to feel that they can help,” Doyle said.

“So whether it’s a performing arts company, that they want to be able to help, or it’s a children hospital, or the local football team, they like to be able to feel that they’re contributing to the success of that organisation.”

PMC Newsdesk | Pacific Scoop

The Rainbow Warrior lists heavily at Marsden Wharf in Auckland Harbour after the bombing by French secret service agents. July, 1985. Image: Courtesy of Greenpeace via Pacific Scoop

Greenpeace New Zealand and its international counterparts commemorated the 25th anniversary of the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior at Marsden Wharf, Auckland Harbour last weekend.

Late in the night, 25 years ago, French secret agents attached two bombs beneath the Rainbow Warrior’s waterline. The bombs later exploded, blowing a huge hole int he vessel’s steel hull, and destroying its propellor shaft.

One of the Rainbow Warrior’s crew, Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira, died in the attack.

It was later found that France had planned and carrier out the attack on the Greenpeace flagship due to sensitivities France, a nuclear power, had over Greenpeace’s planned protest against French nuclear weapons testing in the South Pacific.

It was the first time a foreign force had committed an act of terrorism, in modern times, on New Zealand soil. Two french agents, Captain Dominique Prieur and Commander Alain Mafart, were later arrested and convicted after pleading guilty to manslaughter charges.

The two were sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. But after France threatened economic sanctions against New Zealand, a deal was struck where the two agents would sit out three years of their sentences on a French military base on Hao Atoll. However both Mafart and Prieur were returned to France and freedom well short of completing the imprisonment term.

Greenpeace International has marked the 25th anniversary of the bombing by laying the keel of the Rainbow Warrior III in Poland.

And Greenpeace New Zealand has held a small commemoration at its Mt Eden offices in Auckland, and in the afternoon the documentary ‘The Rainbow Warriors of Waiheke’ screened in Auckland’s Skycity theatre.

Greenpeace International’s Executive Director Kumi Naidoo said: “In the 1980s, using non-violent direct action, Greenpeace faced down one of the world’s nuclear superpowers. Nuclear annihilation was a threat that came close to becoming a reality several times during the Cold War.”

He added: “Today’s biggest threat is climate change, which as we now know, has been underway for decades, since long before the French sank the Warrior.”

In a statement, Greenpeace said the 57 metre Rainbow Warrior III will carry on the work of its predecessors, once launched in October 2011. She will be able to travel the globe under sail, generally only needing to motor when entering port or when involved in actions.

Greenpeace New Zealand Executive Director Bunny McDiarmid said everyone needs to be making big changes right now in order to avoid catastrophic climate change.

“Governments must begin operating at a whole new level; ordinary citizens will have to become active in telling their governments they want action, and consumers are going to have to wean themselves off the habit of constant consumption,” says McDiarmid.

Greenpeace said the 57 metre Rainbow Warrior III will carry on the work of its predecessors, once launched in October 2011. She will be able to travel the globe under sail, generally only needing to motor when entering port or when involved in actions.

The Greenpeace statement follows:

The environmental impacts of her construction, operation and eventual disposal have all been mitigated as much as is possible through good design, and the use of non-toxic materials.

The ship will have a secure media room for broadcasting what its crew witness to the world, and, unusually for a sailing ship, she will have a helicopter pad and hanger.

The Rainbow Warrior III will cost $20 million Euros. Greenpeace NZ is aiming to raise the $400,000 needed for the Rapid Response area, from where the crew will launch their actions.

Since the fundraising site www.rainbow-warrior.org.nz went live just over a week ago, $26,000 has been raised.

“It’s an initial result that I’m sure means, with some more support from New Zealanders, we will meet our target,” says McDiarmid.

“Climate change is something that businesses, governments and people everywhere know they have a vested interest in stopping. But that will only happen with real and urgent action,” she says.