Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2006 Week 10 (19 October) . . Page.. 3372..


ScreenACT

(Question No 1214)

Mr Mulcahy asked the Chief Minister, upon notice, on 19 September 2006 (redirected to the Minister for Businesss and Economic Development):

(1) What proportion of ScreenACT funding to date has been awarded to recipients which (a) are commercial production houses, (b) actually produce film and television content and (c) have their head offices in the ACT;

(2) Who are the top five recipients of ScreenACT funding to date and what amount of funding have they received;

(3) Is ScreenACT funding subject to peer assessment or independent assessment;

(4) If ScreenACT funding is subject to peer assessment, who currently comprises the peer committee.

Mr Stanhope

: The answer to the member's question is as follows:

(1) In relation to ScreenACT discretionary funding:

a. Around 13% of the funding went to organisations or individuals who engage in commercial production - the majority of the discretionary funding was aimed at the sponsorship of industry events;

b. It is unknown what proportion of recipients actually produce film and television content as this was not a criterion for funding under this program;

c. All but one of the recipients of discretionary grant funding from ScreenACT were Canberra region based.

(2) The top recipients of ScreenACT discretionary funding in the financial years 2004/2005 and 2005/2006 were:

a. The Games Developers Association ($25,000)

b. The Academy of Interactive Entertainment ($13,252)

c. The Australian International Documentary Conference ($8,000), and

d. a range of individuals to attend various industry activities ($6,874 in total)

(3) The ScreenACT discretionary funding budget was not subject to peer assessment. Applications were assessed on their merits on an individual basis.

(4) Not Applicable.

Crime—Manuka

(Question No 1215)

Mr Mulcahy asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, upon notice, on 19 September 2006:

(1) How many offences have been reported in the Manuka area in the past six months in relation to (a) burglary, (b) armed hold-ups, (c) vandalism, (d) theft and (e) assault;


Next page . . . . Previous page. . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search