Certain practitioners from the cultural and creative industry gathered at a forum to discuss their difficulties and called on the government to provide assistance in the form of policy.
At the forum, practitioners actively contributed to the discussion session and voiced a series of complaints and comments. At the same time, they articulated certain suggestions and opinions.
The 50 or so practitioners were dissatisfied, if not angry, with the city’s review and assessment scheme in cultural funding. They work in several sub-industries, including fashion and styling, comprehensive design, audiovisual, cultural tourism and products and cultural performance.
One of the examples provided was the requirement of the Cultural Industry Fund that all project submissions be reviewed before and after the issuance of funds. The closure of review before funding issuance could be as early as a month before the actual work is set to commence. As a result, practitioners are unable to update their plans in response to the latest trends or social issues.
Moreover, the post-issuance review forbids any change or alteration to the actual work from the submitted proposals. This, in the practitioners’ opinions, “murders the passion to create” and is also not helpful to the healthy development of the industry.
Based on this foundation of the status-quo, the practitioners recommend the government consider the changing environment in the market its trend as well as review the funding criteria as far as the law permits, so as to allow reasonable mid-way alteration or change to funded designs.
They added that the requirements have had a particularly significant effect on projects submitted or approved during the past couple of years.
The practitioners suggested the government meet with them on a regular basis in order to push forward interactions, and noted that clearer guidelines should be compiled to help the industry’s development.
The practitioners also voiced that they found engaging in written correspondents with the government demanding. Their justification is that they are mostly owners of small and medium sized enterprises and they consequently handle their projects in a hands-on manner.
The practitioners also requested a cross-departmental mechanism to assist them when applying for licenses, exploring the mainland market, conducting marketing and business development, as well as processing relevant procedures.
The practitioners also expressed the desire to see improvements in the constitution of the Creative Industry Fund so as to expand the horizons for the industry and ultimately “achieve economic diversification.”
No Comments