Executive summary

Amplify: A Creative and Cultural Strategy for New Zealand is a draft national strategy outlining how government will prioritise decisions about how to work with and support the sectors’ development. Public consultation on Amplify took place from 4 November to 15 December 2024. Manatū Taonga received 704 submissions on the strategy, as well as hosting eight targeted online workshops, and three in-person workshops in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland, Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington and Ōtautahi Christchurch.

Overall, there was broad support for the development of a national strategy to provide clarity and a long-term plan for the sector’s contributions to New Zealand. Submitters welcomed efforts to coordinate government support of the creative and cultural sectors, especially where this encourages cross-government collaboration.

Amplify vision, targets and principles

There was broad support for the vision statement “Amplify our arts and culture to make New Zealand a global creative powerhouse” and its intent to foster the economic growth of the creative and cultural sectors, although submitters were clear it should not value global recognition over the needs of domestic audiences and practitioners.

Overall, submitters supported the proposed targets and found them relevant to their work and aspirations, noting that additional investment would be needed to achieve their ambitions. Some submissions sought clarity on how the government plans to achieve the proposed targets, noting the Strategy’s five-year timeframe; and on how terms such as ‘soft power’ and ‘active engagement’ are defined. Some felt that the actions of the draft Strategy were not a clear roadmap for achieving the targets. 

There was strong support for Amplify’s draft principles and their guidance of the Strategy. However, some wished for the principles to link more cohesively to Amplify’s actions and explicitly outline commitments to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and ngā toi Māori. 

Investing for Maximum Impact pillar

The majority of comments on the actions under the Investing for Maximum Impact pillar articulated how government investment can be leveraged to better support organisations and practitioners, with some submitters expressing scepticism about the pillar’s value in the absence of additional funding. There were also concerns that proposed actions would lead to more competition within and across sectors for government funding, leading to a funding structure which ignores the broader societal contributions of creative and cultural activity. There was considerable support for initiatives engaging traditionally underrepresented, marginalised or vulnerable groups.

Other strong thematic areas and points of interest related to this pillar concerned raising sector incomes, support for a broad range of cross-portfolio objectives and outcomes, and emphasis on the multi-faceted value and benefits of the creative and cultural sectors. 

Nurturing Talent pillar 

The most significant focus areas for feedback related to this pillar related to arts and culture in education, and valuing creative careers. Many thought that the education curriculum needs to provide greater exposure to creative and cultural practices, which would aid learning development and also provide career opportunities for professionals partnering with schools (evidenced by the Creatives in Schools programme). 

Submissions saw value in the Strategy supporting a stable career pipeline offering sustainable career opportunities and stable income sources and engaged strongly with career-related actions. Submitters highlighted programmes already underway which allowed professionals to grow capability while on the job and stressed the value of sector-led professional development opportunities.  

Reducing Barriers to Growth pillar 

Submissions provided suggestions on how regulations and legislation could be updated to meet the needs of different sectors, including to address regulatory cost barriers, inequities in treatment, and to protect against emerging threats.

Many submitters acknowledged the rapidly changing technological environment of the creative and cultural sectors. The emerging potential of AI poses risks and opportunities, and government direction on this matter was welcomed. The need to protect the data sovereignty of ngā toi Māori was also a key theme from feedback on this pillar, with submissions expressing concerns of misappropriation, exploitation and a disregard for tīkanga if AI and other emerging technologies are left unregulated.  

Other key themes and topics raised 

While submissions noted that Amplify has a broad scope and is relevant to many sectors, certain groups and communities did not see themselves represented in the Strategy. They felt that the economic-focussed tone of the Strategy neglected to recognise the diverse needs of New Zealanders and subsequently creative and cultural work would be less accessible.  

There was also a strong sentiment that Amplify adopted language which commodified creative and cultural activity and did not recognise their broader societal value. Submissions suggested the Strategy be repositioned to acknowledge the less quantifiable impacts of creative and cultural sector, such as its role on nurturing community, honouring national identity and protecting taonga.  

Introduction

What is Amplify?

Amplify is a draft national strategy outlining how government will prioritise decisions about how to work with and support the sectors’ development.

The draft vision for the strategy is:

Amplify our arts and culture to make New Zealand a global creative powerhouse.

Amplify takes an action-oriented approach to setting out the Government’s focus for amplifying creativity and culture in New Zealand over the next six years to 2030.

Proposed 2030 targets

Four draft targets are proposed as indicators:

• New Zealand ranks among the top 25 nations in the world for culture and heritage soft power, resulting in high-value cultural tourism and exports
• More New Zealanders are actively engaging with New Zealand arts, culture and heritage
• The GDP contribution of the arts and creative sector increases to at least $20 billion, with a focus on exports
• The median income for creative professionals more closely matches the median income for New Zealanders earning a wage or salary.

Guiding principles

The five principles guiding Amplify are:

1. Government values all creative work, people, and audiences, and takes the unique attributes and benefits of the creative and cultural sectors into account during policy development and investment.
2. Government works to connect New Zealand creatives to local and global audiences.
3. Government provides support for creative and cultural practitioners at all stages of their development, and clear pathways into work that uses their skills.
4. Government acknowledges Māori arts, culture and heritage as taonga and important to New Zealand’s culture and identity, and partners with Māori to enable their cultural aspirations.
5. Government supports and recognises the value to people’s lives of lifelong engagement with arts, culture, creativity and ngā toi Māori.

Proposed strategic pillars

To reach these targets, the draft strategy has three focus areas or strategic ‘pillars’ which outline initiatives and actions the Government proposes to take to support the sector over the next six years.

Investing for maximum impact

Government investment, including the $450 million investment in Vote Arts, Culture and Heritage maximises value for New Zealand from the creative and cultural sectors.

Nurturing talent

Supporting New Zealand’s creative and cultural talent pipeline and sustainable career opportunities.

Reducing barriers to growth

Modernising and streamlining government regulation so it enables the creative and cultural sectors to thrive.

How we consulted

Public consultation on the draft Amplify strategy ran for six weeks from 4 November 2024 to 15 December 2024. The Ministry hosted two online public information sessions to introduce the draft strategy and answer questions, and three in-person workshops alongside deep-dive sessions on particular parts of our sectors. A recording of the information session with New Zealand Sign Language interpretation was made available on the Amplify consultation page on the Manatū Taonga website.

Amplify: A Creative and Cultural Strategy for New Zealand

Submissions

Online survey

People interested in providing feedback on the key elements of the draft strategy were invited to complete an online survey. A printable version of the survey was also made available on the Ministry’s website: Amplify survey – print version

Written submissions (via email or post)

People wanting to provide more detailed feedback were invited to email submissions to [email protected] or mail a submission to the Ministry’s PO Box address.

Workshops and meetings

Online ‘deep dive’ workshops (sub-sector specific sessions)

A series of online ‘deep dive’ sessions took place in November and December 2024 with stakeholders from different parts of the creative and cultural sectors:

• Regional Arts and Wellbeing – 13 November
• Arts and Education – 15 November
• GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, Museums) and Heritage – 19 November
• Screen and Gaming – 21 November
• Creative Industry – 25 November
• Visual and Performing Arts - 27 November
• Music and Publishing - 29 November
• Ngā toi Māori – 3 December.

In-person consultation workshops (Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch)

The Ministry held a further three in-person workshops for creative and cultural practitioners in Auckland on 22 November, in Christchurch on 29 November, and in Wellington on 5 December. Those interested in participating were invited to register by emailing [email protected]

Overview of submissions

In total, 704 submissions were received, comprising 544 online survey responses and 160 written submissions. Of the 704 submissions, 64 percent were submitted by individuals, 35 percent on behalf of a group, organisation, or community group and <1 percent came from an iwi or hapū. The majority of written submissions (72 percent) were from groups or organisations, while most of the survey responses (75 percent) were from individuals.

A number of groups and organisations representing Māori interests provided written submissions, and Māori perspectives were the focus of a Ngā Toi Māori workshop during the consultation period. A range of sub-sector specific perspectives were captured during consultation workshops which have been incorporated into the document.

Feedback on draft Amplify framework

Vision

Over 71 percent of survey respondents indicated that they agreed with or strongly agreed with the vision statement. Those who liked the vision statement felt the aim of transforming New Zealand into a “global creative powerhouse” provided a clear vision of how the Government plans to support New Zealand’s creative and culture sectors.

Some respondents suggested that the Amplify vision is suitable if applied to highly commercial arts or creative industries, but less relevant to those working in other areas such as cultural heritage and traditional art forms. It was seen, by some, to overlook wellbeing, social cohesion, cultural identity, community resilience and other outcomes, and alienates those whose work aligns with these areas.

“We commend the Government’s vision for making Aotearoa New Zealand a global creative powerhouse by 2030. The focus on enhancing creativity and culture aligns closely with our organisation’s mission to invest in initiatives that ensure artists and creatives can continue to enrich our lives and foster vibrant communities across our nation.”

“This vision seems very limited - just making arts and culture an export commodity does not enrich the lives of New Zealanders whose culture it is.”

Making New Zealand a “global creative powerhouse”

Submitters commented on the positioning of the vision (and wider strategy framework), and whether it’s focus should be domestic or international. Most feedback suggested international export markets and global recognition should not be prioritised over New Zealand creatives, communities, audiences and outcomes.

Some felt that the Strategy’s focus on exports and global impact would result in cultural appropriation and a lack of authenticity and diversity. Other respondents felt that success overseas builds New Zealander’s credibility and confidence. Many of those in favour of the vision said that showcasing the richness and diversity of New Zealand’s arts and culture on the global stage will foster economic prosperity and a stronger national identity.

Some submitters were confused as to what was meant by global creative powerhouse, while others felt New Zealand was already a creative powerhouse. Feedback also referenced ngā toi Māori as a critical and unique part of what makes New Zealand a creative powerhouse in a global cultural context, and what differentiates and makes us special internationally.

“It is our unique culture, strongly carried in waiata and Māori art, that makes us "Kiwi" when overseas”

“Global recognition makes us locally proud. Going global to find commercial profitable audiences will support local talent and stories.”   

‘Amplifying’ arts and culture

Like ‘powerhouse’, a considerable number of respondents viewed the term ‘amplify’ as ambiguous and questioned what it means in practice (for example, getting more out of what already exists, or increasing scale to make a bigger impact). These submitters suggested that the Strategy should articulate a more action-oriented vision, focused on tangible outcomes. It was also noted that for New Zealand to become a global creative powerhouse further support is needed.

“Amplify is a fantastic word, a real buzzword, but at the same time, vague.”  

“We recognise the vision… but acknowledge that amplification (as a creative metaphor) ultimately requires energy, support, activation and infrastructure to reach people.”  

Targets

The proposed targets received broad support for their aspirations and intent to boost the economic and social impact of creative and cultural activity. Submissions noted the interconnected nature of the targets, as well as their relevance for a broad range of organisations and practitioners. Submitters felt that achieving the targets by 2030 would require new investment and resources, and expressed concerns on how the targets will be achieved within the Strategy’s five-year timeframe.

Some submitters believed that the targets could be reordered into a more logical pathway with increased participation and raising the median income for creative professionals positioned first to recognise that they are key to realising the sector’s economic potential. Others felt there was a disconnect between the actions in the strategy and the targets and were not convinced the proposed actions would be sufficient to deliver against the targets.

Submitters also felt the targets as drafted failed to capture certain priorities for the creative and cultural sectors, such as:

• Uplifting ngā toi Māori and honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi commitments
• Ensuring the sustainability of New Zealand creative and cultural work, including the preservation of collections.

Target: New Zealand ranks among the top 25 nations in the world for culture and heritage soft power, resulting in high-value cultural tourism and exports

Those who supported this target thought it was important for New Zealand’s cultural sector to strengthen its presence internationally. Several submissions queried the placement of this target, seeking an explanation about how ‘soft power’ was measured, and how the creative and cultural sectors could influence this if rankings were reliant on a range of activity across different sectors. Additionally, some stated that an improvement in rankings would not result in any tangible outcomes for New Zealand audiences or creative and cultural practitioners. There were also concerns that prioritising ‘soft power’ and exports would come at the expense of recognising the inherent value of arts, culture and heritage for New Zealand. 

Target: More New Zealanders are actively engaging with New Zealand arts, culture and heritage

This target was supported by the majority of submissions. Some submitters requested that it should be the Strategy’s leading target, as equitable and accessible engagement to New Zealand creative and cultural activity is a goal shared by many creative and cultural organisations and practitioners.

There were queries on how ‘active engagement’ would be defined and measured and that the target should include a specific figure. Some submissions outlined how the action’s parameters could be identified, including by using existing data (for example, audience numbers for funded content) or identifying known data gaps (such as research on barriers to accessing creative and cultural activity).

Target: The GDP contribution of the arts and creative sector increases to at least $20 billion, with a focus on exports.

Primary feedback on this target was that GDP contribution was not an accurate and inclusive measurement of the contribution of the arts and creative sectors to New Zealand. By prioritising commercial outcomes, there were concerns that the broader societal benefits of creative and cultural endeavours would be ignored or incorrectly captured, including the value of te ao Māori and ngā toi Māori to New Zealand.

Those supportive of the action asked for a more ambitious GDP target accompanied by more investment and a clearer roadmap to achieving the target’s economic aims, including more export-orientated actions.

Target: The median income for creative professionals more closely matches the median income for New Zealanders earning a wage or salary.

Most submitters supported the intentions of this target, although some thought the target would be difficult to achieve by 2030 without extra funding from central government. Many believed that income growth for artists would lead to greater export and GDP contributions as well as increased engagement with arts, culture and heritage.

Several submitters suggested that this target be amended to place the focus of the target on income earnt from creative practice. To help with measuring the success of this target, submitters suggested including an exact figure, for example, 65 percent of the national median income.

“While the “direction of travel” shown throughout the strategy is positive, there is a lack of clear and specific actions which show how the Government intends to progress its objectives.”

“The achievement of these targets will require a …well-resourced sector along with new investment into research, development and planning alongside investment into current activities.

The strategy needs to recognise more clearly the role and potential of ngā toi Māori both in assisting to reach participation targets, soft power in culture and heritage and the potential to increase GDP of the arts and cultural sector.”

Principles

There was strong support for Amplify’s draft principles. The principle that the highest number of respondents (80 percent) identified as very important was “Government supports and recognises the value to people’s lives of lifelong engagement with arts, culture, creativity and ngā toi Māori”.

There were also calls for the principles to link more cohesively to Amplify’s actions, with some respondents noting they felt the actions do not accurately reflect the principles.

Further areas that submitters felt the principles overlooked included:

• the needs of the disability sector;
• the value of regional arts;
• the sustainability of cultural sectors; and
• the diversity of creative and cultural careers pathways.

Additionally, a few submissions expressed a desire for guiding principles to more clearly articulate government’s role in supporting te Tiriti o Waitangi and ngā toi Māori, either by reordering and prioritising the principles on supporting and acknowledging Māori arts, culture and heritage, or by adopting more explicit language.

The principle “Government acknowledges Māori arts, culture and heritage as taonga” also received some feedback, as it was felt it did not adequately convey commitment or recognise ngā toi Māori as taonga. Stronger language such as “protects” or “partners” was seen as more appropriate.

“The five guiding principles that guide Amplify – we are excited by the support and recognition for the value of life-long engagement with arts, culture, creativity and ngā toi Māori, and that the conditions and qualities of the creative sectors have attributes, qualities and needs that may be different to other sectors.”

Investing for Maximum Impact pillar

Sixty eight percent of survey respondents (largely from individuals) either agreed or strongly agreed that they could see themselves, their organisation or community benefiting from the actions under this pillar. Twenty two percent were neutral, while 10 percent disagreed or strongly disagreed.

Survey respondents were asked to select their top three priority actions under each pillar. The following data details the actions that submitters engaged the most with.

Investing for Maximum Impact: Priority actions ranked by survey submitters

Submissions engaging with the ‘Investing for Maximum Impact’ pillar provided numerous suggestions on how existing funding can be leveraged to deliver stronger outcomes for organisations and practitioners. Criticisms of the pillar touched on its export-driven focus and concerns about how feasibly the actions can be achieved without additional funding.

Feedback on proposed ‘Investing for maximum impact’ actions

Action: Develop a structure for central government funding of the creative and cultural sectors that simplifies access and purposefully leverages other sources of funding, for example local government, iwi and private funding.

Most feedback on this action noted the critical role that investment from central government plays in funding the creative and cultural sectors and supported a more systematic and structured approach to funding. Submitters noted the competitive nature of applying for central government funding and welcomed clearer and more equitable criteria.

Several submitters highlighted the difficulties of leveraging other sources of funding when there are limited funds to draw on. Some local government organisations said it would be difficult to fund additional creative and cultural activity due to the economic context and increased business costs. The result would be uneven levels of funding depending on the council’s financial situation.

Submitters were concerned that leveraging private funding would lead to increased competition amongst organisations and different artforms, and disadvantage regional and rural centres with lower population and wealth levels. It was also noted that private funding takes significant work to attract and maintain.

Some submissions argued for incentives to increase private funding like the United Kingdom’s Gift Aid.

“Leveraging other sources of funding is challenging for the sector in the current economic environment, as local government, iwi, hapū, philanthropic organisations and private investors are under pressure to address pressing infrastructure needs (for local government and iwi) and social needs such as food and housing. The strategy needs to be realistic about what can be achieved in this regard, especially without additional resources.”

Action: Work across government to enable the creative and cultural sectors to support cross-portfolio outcomes, for example supporting improved health outcomes, or supporting rehabilitation and reducing reoffending in the justice system.

There was broad support for this action, with submitters highlighting the wide cross-portfolio impact of creative and cultural activities, including in education, trade, tourism, health, sport and justice, and the multifaceted benefits for New Zealand. Submitters provided examples of current initiatives including the Arts Access Aotearoa ‘Arts in Corrections’ programme, which uses art as a tool to support the rehabilitation process of prisoners and recommended the establishment of a cross-agency working group to support implementation of this action.

It was also suggested that the creative and cultural sectors could support outcomes of other government funding such as the Regional Infrastructure Fund and government procurement more generally, for example, by procuring books or music from domestic practitioners and suppliers.

“Establishing a cross- agency working group would create beneficial opportunities to focus on shared investment and outcomes across sectors.”

“Arts in Corrections programmes have been shown to be effective in helping reduce recidivism and crime in our communities…With consistent funding and support they could have even more impact.”

Action: Partner with sector representative bodies and Māori and Pacific creative and cultural practitioners to grow creative exports.

Feedback stressed the importance of growing creative exports and expanding New Zealand’s presence internationally to secure additional funding, promote visibility of New Zealand works, and boost employment opportunities. Various sectors expressed a desire to boost exports and attract international investment with the support of government. Several organisations also expressed a desire to partner with government to support this outcome. Suggestions on how to further grow creative exports, included:

• shifting New Zealand’s trade focus to creative digital services exports that do not face the same barriers and risks as goods trade
• targeting Asia as a key growth market
• expanding the scope of the Indigenous Peoples Economic and Trade Cooperation Arrangement (IPETCA)
• maximising international tourist spend on arts, culture and heritage
• increasing support for creatives to be present and showcase work at trade events in key export markets
  • focusing trade missions on large corporations as well as countries
  • providing offshore public relations support and contestable funding for content development.

Conversely, some voices advocated for a stronger focus on domestic capability before focusing on international presence, arguing that international recognition cannot come without a strong domestic foundation.

Some submissions noted the strong presence of ngā toi Māori globally and saw this as key to strengthening New Zealand’s creative and cultural exports. There were also concerns that Amplify’s export-driven focus was at odds with tikanga Māori and would result in the misappropriation and exploitation of te ao Māori. Submitters felt the Crown-Māori partnership was critical to ensuring the realisation of these benefits for a thriving creative and cultural system, in a way that does not have negative impacts on Māori.

Other feedback supported dedicated funding, training programs, and pathways for Pacific creatives to help build capability and ensure Pacific voices are better represented in New Zealand’s cultural exports.

“We welcome the government’s emphasis on export and the proposed action to partner with sector representative bodies.”

“We note the strategy is silent on the role of creative technology and its potential as a high growth and weightless driver of export revenue. The digital technology sector is currently on track to overtake the primary industries as New Zealand’s biggest export sector. We see significant opportunity to leverage the creative and technology industries to drive productivity and export growth.”

“Māori art for Māori people first and foremost: it’s not for the government to decide Māori art and culture should be for export. I tautoko tangata whenua’s right to have tino rangatiratanga over their own cultural aspirations.”

Action: Develop a research programme to strengthen the evidence base for the creative and cultural sectors, led by Manatū Taonga Ministry for Culture and Heritage

The majority of submissions supported the need for a robust evidence base for the creative and cultural sectors including the intention to collate data across sectors and government to inform future decision-making. Submitters also acknowledged the difficulty of adequately capturing the value of creative and cultural endeavours in quantitative terms.

Many submissions provided examples of research relating to their sector and its demonstrated value for New Zealand. Several international examples were also cited as exemplar case studies such as Screen Australia’s annual Drama Report tracking the investment of scripted production.

Submitters identified gaps where they welcomed further research, including:

• export data
• financial contributions of creative and cultural industries to other sectors
• sustainability of creative and cultural industries, including on a regional and sector level
• suitable metrics for measuring creative and cultural activity
• soft power
• the impact of an ageing volunteer base.

Some submissions critiqued the approach of “developing a research programme” and suggested that it would be more effective to collate existing research instead of commissioning new research that would not provide tangible benefits to the sector. For example, feedback noted significant recent research, such as the 2024 report Measuring and Articulating the Value of Live Performance in Aotearoa.  

“don’t think this is an optional action to be balanced against other priorities, as it will be required for government to undertake its strategy.”

“There is a strong evidence base already. A research programme tends to become an end in itself, soaking up valuable human and financial resources.”

Action: Explore options for government to support the creative and cultural sectors through immigration settings, for example through visa requirements.

Submissions on this action welcomed efforts to ensure that New Zealand’s immigration system supported creative and cultural activity.

Submitters commented on current skill gaps in sectors such as game development and music therapy, but also wished to see domestic talent being prioritised. Some submitters recommended that a condition of international performers’ visas be that they use local support acts as this would help “ensure the sustainability of New Zealand’s music ecosystem”.

Submitters said that the immigration system could also be used to incentivise philanthropic funding. Further recommendations included;

• amending the International Visitor Levy scope to support cultural heritage places
• requiring Entertainers Work Visa holders to gain a Letter of Non-Objection from relevant unions for all performances in New Zealand
• more timely processing of visas and support from Immigration New Zealand to help creatives navigate the immigration system.

“New Zealand’s creative sector, including screen and gaming, have benefited greatly from having access to international expertise and specialist knowledge. We would welcome any efforts to streamline the regulation around immigration of creative talent into New Zealand.”

“Including local artists in international lineups aligns with recent research on the live music sector, bolstering economic vitality while ensuring the sustainability of New Zealand’s music ecosystem.”

Action: Identify opportunities to promote existing creative and cultural events to showcase our unique cultures globally and boost cultural tourism.

Supporters of this action spoke to existing activity that contributed to boosting cultural tourism, including New Zealand museums showcasing our culture, international touring of New Zealand musicians, and Auckland’s hosting of the World Choir Games in 2024.

Some submitters saw success for this action being achieved by establishing more investment and easier access to formal mechanisms such as the Major Events Fund, the Cultural Diplomacy International Programme or trade missions.

There were also concerns that boosting cultural tourism could lead to cultural exploitation and appropriation. Some submissions sought clarification on how this action would be implemented and how success will be measured.

“The emphasis on cultural tourism and exports in the Strategy is of concern as it poses risks to the mana and integrity of Aotearoa New Zealand’s unique cultural identity.”

“We support the strategy’s goal to enhance cultural diplomacy and showcase our national heritage. This activity is already woven into our mahi via international research relationships, exchanges, diplomatic hosting, and international touring exhibitions.”

Action: Support the repatriation of taonga tūturu and kōiwi

There was broad support for the repatriation of taonga tūturu and kōiwi and many submissions thought that the scope of the action should be expanded, including to preserve and protect existing and future taonga in New Zealand collections. Several submissions provided more detail on work underway, and the breadth of stakeholders and partnerships involved, including between museums, iwi and hapū, local and international organisations and institutions, and Pacific Island nations.

Some submissions felt that taonga Māori was a more appropriate term than taonga tūturu, and that Moriori should be included and acknowledged as an important part of New Zealand’s cultural heritage. Submissions also expressed a desire for permanent repatriation policy, including a domestic repatriation policy, and for the Strategy to recognise the work between New Zealand museums in supporting repatriation.

Action: Incentivise collaboration and the building of capability to attract audiences to creative content

Submissions in support of this action saw attracting new audiences as the key to success in an evolving technological environment and noted the benefits that existing collaboration is bringing to sectors and organisations. Various submitters, especially those representing smaller organisations, described their difficulties attracting audiences, and urged for stronger sector, regional and inter-government collaboration so that there is adequate resource and infrastructure to build capability. Other recommendations for change included incentivising collaboration with organisations and individuals outside of the creative sector, to improve marketing, promotion and audience reach.

Key barriers to collaboration and attracting audiences identified included:

• funding structures that require organisations to compete against each other;
• the difficultly for domestic producers to compete with multinationals, for example, domestic screen content competing for viewership with Netflix;
• creative and cultural works being centralised in urban locations and therefore limiting accessibility for those in rural areas; and
• a lack of funds available to invest in building capability.

Some submitters expressed concerns that a focus on attracting audiences will lead to a prioritisation of popular appeal and a framing of creative and cultural endeavours as products, potentially harming the quality of creative and cultural work and neglecting concerns around intellectual property (IP) and data sovereignty.

Nurturing Talent pillar

Seventy one percent of survey respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that they could see themselves, their organisation or community benefitting from the actions under the Nurturing Talent Pillar. Twenty two percent were neutral, while six percent disagreed or strongly disagreed.

The three actions in this pillar which survey respondents engaged the most with are detailed in the data below.

Nurturing Talent: Priority actions ranked by survey submitters

Feedback on this pillar focused on the importance of creative and cultural education and how creative and cultural careers can be better supported. Submissions emphasised the need for more consistent career development opportunities and provided suggestions on how capability and infrastructure for the sectors can be strengthened.

Feedback on Nurturing Talent actions

Action: Develop a creative education work programme to increase learners’ exposure to New Zealand creative and cultural activity through the school curricula, working with sector partners

Most submissions were supportive of this action. This action was viewed by some as a critical priority for government, citing the declining rate of students choosing creative and cultural subjects, the disestablishment of school libraries, and a lack of free creative and cultural programmes as evidence of the decreasing infrastructure allowing young people to engage to with creative and cultural activity.

Submitters used many examples to illustrate the benefits of enhancing creative and cultural development in the education system. This included the Creatives in Schools[1] programme, which a large number of submissions advocated for reinstating or using to inform future initiatives.

The New Zealand arts curriculum refresh in 2027 is viewed by some as an opportunity to embed essential workforce skills into creative and cultural education. However, several noted that this would need substantial investment and capability training to deliver envisioned outcomes. Others expressed hope that the curriculum refresh would facilitate more intentional government prioritisation of creative and cultural learning. A few submissions stressed the importance of ensuring creative and cultural education remains diverse and accessible for children from a range of backgrounds.

Those from the cultural heritage sector noted their role in supporting the wider education curriculum beyond arts and allowing students to engage with a sense of national identity outside of the classroom. Identified barriers included access to museums, lack of teacher capability in this area, and insufficient investment.

It was also noted that libraries and museums provide historical context and research information for most other sectors, and this could be better recognised.

Some submitters thought there should be a greater emphasis on the fundamental importance of literacy to all creative and cultural initiatives and the importance of reversing the current decline in literacy rates. 

Finally, submitters emphasised the importance of creative education outside the formal education system and identified this as a key gap in the strategy. These submitters called for greater recognition of the role that participating in community groups such as kapa haka, theatrical societies, or church and youth groups have in feeding a workforce into the industry.

“It is important to see creativity as a component that supports all elements of the education programmes, not just as an additional subject.”

“Traditional education settings offer no benefit to most artists (with exception to Māori especially regards to language and dance). Creative communities and environments are often more important.”

Action: Partner with creative industry representatives to support skills development of creative professionals (including new sector qualifications) and improve the vocational education system to meet industry needs.

Submitters felt it was important that education institutions partner with industry to meet workforce needs and develop a direct pathway from formal education to industry vacancies. The University of Canterbury’s Professional and Community Engagement (PACE) programme was pointed to as an example of success. Feedback also stressed the importance of government supporting on-the-job training and training programmes facilitated by creative organisations. Examples cited included the New Zealand Young Writers Festival, Kahurangi Toi Ātea, the National Screen Industry Training Programme, Live Nation’s music industry programmes, and Māoriland Indigenous Co-Lab.

Some feedback advocated for free vocational training for specific business elements associated with being a self-employed creative, particularly as those in the creative and cultural sectors often have low incomes and high student debt.   

Some larger groups and employers in parts of the sector, including live performance, voiced strong support for developing new qualifications.

Additionally, submissions identified challenges to workforce development, such as:

• a lack of domestic capability to support skills development
• a lack of representation in the Ministry of Education’s vocational education and training reforms, leading to a misalignment between industry needs and formal qualification standards
• insufficient funding or discontinuation of workforce development programmes
• losing talent overseas and to other industries due to low pay, and a lack of opportunities and incentives for mid-career artists and practitioners to stay in New Zealand, with many higher-level jobs going to international talent.

“Investigate the reallocation of funding through the education system, addressing the top-heavy approach to funding universities over on-the-job training for the sector”

“We would welcome the development of apprenticeship programmes where emerging practitioners gain paid work by working alongside experienced mentors on our productions.”

Action: Develop a national training strategy in partnership with iwi, hapū, Pacific cultural practitioners and the broader creative and cultural sectors to support succession planning for vital roles, such as in cultural conservation.

Feedback on this action supported succession planning for vital roles (including cultural conservation) and highlighted the importance of preserving New Zealand’s creative and cultural practices. Submitters also touched on the lack of infrastructure and capacity to train people for these roles, for example, in cultural conservation. Some submitters felt cultural careers should be sustainable before robust succession planning can take place.

Many submissions stated that the implementation of this action needs be mindful of te ao Māori and Pacific cultural practices, as “succession planning” lends itself to an economic outlook which may be at odds with cultural objectives. Submissions advocated for longer-term investment in initiatives nurturing specialist skills to care for taonga Māori, such as those funded by the Mātauranga Māori Te Awe Kotuku programme. Submissions recommended that a strategy to support succession planning must be developed in partnership with iwi, hapū so Māori perspectives on creativity, wellbeing and sustainable development can be honoured. It was suggested that the lack of support for conservation training could be addressed by a combination of workplace-based training, formal qualifications and research centres.

“We strongly support the development of such a strategy and the rationale behind it…. Conservators are highly trained individuals and there is currently no formal training programme in the country; we have long viewed this as a critical risk for the sector.”

“I am wary of efforts to funnel all education through vocational, training and institutional channels”

Action: Explore options to better support key institutions that provide career entry and early-mid career opportunities for creative professionals.

The uncertain nature of creative and cultural employment was a common theme from submissions, while funding and resourcing were identified as key barriers preventing career entry and early-mid career opportunities.

There was lots of engagement on what could constitute a “key institution” for this action. Some felt that the role of the vocational education sector and industry bodies in providing career entry opportunities should be more explicitly referenced. In the galleries, libraries, archives and museums (GLAM) sector, it was noted that larger art galleries and museums play a significant role in career entry roles and providing internationally transferable training experiences. However, these roles are sporadically funded, and funding is insecure. Feedback also highlighted that community arts centres act as incubators for emerging artists and cultural workers. Investing in these types of organisations would strengthen critical pathways, building a robust talent pipeline benefitting the entire creative sector.

In relation to opportunities for visual or object-based artists, feedback suggested institutional support could be targeted to exhibition development or new commissioning and acquisitions.

Some submitters suggested government work closely with regional arts organisations to introduce targeted programmes that identify and nurture emerging talent in regional areas, including through mentorships, training, studio space, and digital infrastructure.

“There is a marked drop off in performers with 10 – 15 years’ experience. Exit interviews with these performers confirms that the precarious nature of the work means that once performers get to a certain point of their lives, they look for secure and regular incomes so they can support themselves and their families.”

Action: Partner with ngā toi Māori organisations, mātanga toi, iwi and hapori Māori to strengthen infrastructure for the health and sustainability of Māori arts, culture and heritage, for example recent funding for kapa haka.

Māori arts, culture and heritage were viewed as being at the core of New Zealand’s national identity. Submissions acknowledged that this action upholds te Tiriti o Waitangi commitments, although some called for more explicit reference to te Tiriti.

Submitters were clear that they saw government’s role in this action as supporting the aspirations iwi Māori have for Māori arts, not dictating their development. Submitters noted that efforts to strengthen the health and sustainability of Māori arts, culture and heritage should be led by ngā toi Māori organisations, mātanga toi, iwi and hapori Māori so tīkanga can be observed.

Some feedback argued that resourcing already well-established Māori entities is not benefiting or reaching those most in need, nor helping to preserve Tūturu knowledge holders and practitioners in Māori communities – specifically stone tool practitioners and carvers of stone, whale bone, or native wood. Findings from the COVID-19 Wellbeing Survey for Te Matatini (2020) and Ngā Toi Māori (2024) were cited to support this perspective.

There was also feedback on the need for the Strategy to define what was meant by ‘partner’ in this context. This feedback suggested the Strategy provide a clear framework for equitable and reciprocal partnership.

“We support working in partnership with Māori to support the development and sustainability of Toi and Mātauranga Māori. Ensuring this approach is led by hapū and iwi will support this partnership being responsive to the needs of local communities.”

Action: Explore the viability of the establishment and expansion of regional centres of excellence to promote creative and cultural sector growth, including supporting the sustainable practice of ngā toi Māori.

Most submissions were supportive of this action, emphasising a need for regional centres of excellence to promote collaboration and information across organisations, sectors and disciplines to achieve envisioned outcomes. Examples such as Te Aitanga a Hauiti on the East Coast, Toro Academy in Gisborne were cited as case studies. Some recommended drawing upon the skills of local organisations, ngā toi Māori and Pacific cultural practitioners to capture sector needs at a localised level.

A small number of submissions disagreed with the action, noting that there were already regional centres present in New Zealand and that creating additional clusters of creative and cultural activity may hinder access for local communities.

“We agree with a regional centres of excellence model as being a wise move. Even more than physical regions though we would like to recommend recognising that in a high-tech information based industry like music production these clusters are not just located in physical regions but express as organisational networks.”

Action: Provide capability training for creative and cultural organisations’ governance bodies, including in supporting their organisations to be financially stable, grow audiences and diversify funding

Most submitters agreed with the importance of growing capability for governance bodies. Smaller organisations particularly welcomed this action and highlighted that many of their governance boards were occupied by volunteers for whom capability training would be valuable. Governance training would bring numerous benefits to organisations, including digital capability development, easier navigation of the funding system, and specific regional insights.

Some feedback, including from submitters with significant experience in running arts organisations, outlined the need for a comprehensive training programme for emerging arts leaders, which would also provide a pathway for arts professionals interested in management. Submitters noted that those in charge of small organisations are typically passionate arts practitioners who have fallen into leadership roles and are forced to learn on the job, often without support. 

Further skills identified as vital to governance bodies included financial management, risk identification, fundraising, and promotion. It was suggested that resources should be consolidated so professional expertise could be shared between organisations.

Action: Investigate options to increase New Zealanders’ access to the national collections, including through touring exhibitions and long-term loans to regional and local galleries.

Submissions acknowledged that access to national collections was vital for New Zealanders to understand the country’s history and share a sense of national identity. Digital access was suggested as a way for New Zealanders to engage with national collections regardless of location, promoting equitable access while also allowing organisations to upgrade their digital infrastructure with government investment.

Several submitters emphasised that funding of infrastructure would be required for regions to receive touring exhibitions. Initiatives such as a national loan and care fund was seen as a valuable form of support from central government. 

Submitters also advocated for continued support of national heritage collections and for digitisation to preserve access. Examples included Ngā Taonga Sound and Vision collections, the Māori and Pacific archive at University of Auckland, and the Music Hire collection at National Library.

“This is really vital, many of the music boards and guilds carry out their organisational support and development for free. This is not the case for many other industries where they receive significant funding and training support. It will pay off in spades as the more time highly experienced people can afford to lift up and nurture talent the greater success for the industry and society as a whole.”

Reducing Barriers to Growth pillar

Sixty two percent of survey respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that they could see themselves, their organisation or community benefitting from this pillar’s actions. The three actions which survey respondents engaged the most with are detailed in the data below.

Reducing Barriers to Growth: Priority actions ranked by survey submitters

The ‘Reducing Barriers to Growth’ pillar received a diverse range of feedback, with many submissions outlining the ways which regulation or legislation could be strengthened to facilitate their work. Submissions emphasised the importance of fit-for-purpose regulation that is conscious of future challenges and opportunities, including around AI and IP.

Feedback on Reducing Barriers to Growth actions

Action: Work across government to identify and update regulation that impacts on the creative and cultural sectors’ ability to grow and produce creative work, such as the Public Lending Right for New Zealand Authors Act, the Copyright Act, and alcohol licensing regulation

Submissions acknowledged the value and protections that regulations provide, while also highlighting a diverse range of regulations that could be improved to better facilitate the creative and cultural sectors’ ability to grow and produce creative work. Submitters wanted to understand timeframes and feasibility given constrained resources and the need for cross-government involvement in regulatory reforms.

Copyright Act – Feedback included strong criticism of the 50-year copyright term with many submitters asking for an extension to 70 years, as in the European Union. Some submissions suggested that New Zealand is sitting on a wealth of existing copyrights of musical works that have yet to be fully realised to their true financial capacity; something that would help meet the $20 billion GDP target in the Strategy. There was a view that if the Government wants New Zealand to capitalise on unique cultural and creative outputs, then ensuring IP and copyright protection in the age of AI data scraping is vital. Some saw this as a priority to avoid spending the next few decades trying to rewind damage caused by the mass misuse and stealing of local content.

Other suggested changes to current copyright settings included addressing the current gap in copyright licenses available to schools (for example, 450,000 school children are not covered by the Screen Copyright License) and amending section 48 of the Copyright Act to permit Private Training Establishments to use screen content for educational purposes as other educational establishments are permitted to do.

Alcohol Licensing regimes – Some submitters expressed concern about changes to alcohol licensing regulation due to it being a major source of funding.

Music industry representatives stated that inconsistent application of alcohol licensing regulation by District Licensing Committees creates significant barriers, concentrating shows in a few regions and depriving other areas of the economic and social benefits of live entertainment. Specific challenges identified were:

• licensing delays that force last-minute changes, increasing costs and logistical difficulties
• Complex compliance requirements that disproportionately affect smaller operators and grassroots creativity.

To align with Amplify’s vision of vibrant, accessible events, recommendations included, multi-year licenses for recurrent events, a “festival license” designed to account for the unique nature and lead times of major events, and a “pre-approved” status for event organisers, reducing red tape and processing times.

Several international models were cited as examples:

• The UK’s Licensing Act 2003, which introduced a unified licensing structure and Temporary Event Notices
• New South Wales, Australia, which recently adopted streamlined processes for venues and pop-up events.

Public Lending Right for New Zealand Authors Act – A number of specific recommendations were made for improving the legislation included:

• making lending rights payments for all copies of books held in libraries
• a more transparent and accurate way of surveying libraries for copies of books
  • a top-up of the public lending right (based on consumer price index increases)
  • adding digital and educational books to the Public Lending Right
• requiring libraries to source their collections from New Zealand not Australia
• and setting up a literacy/ literature Commission similar to the Film Commission

There was also support for the introduction of local content targets for literature on RNZ or a legal deposit requiring New Zealand-published materials be deposited within the National Library of New Zealand.

Other suggested changes to regulatory and legislative settings included:

• ensuring the galleries, libraries, archives and museums (GLAM) sector has permanent exemptions written into legislation for the collecting and exhibiting of NZ's heritage, for example, exemption from the Fire and Emergency levy, Firearms licencing, and the Privacy Amendment Act
• a standardisation of sound control policy and enforcement across all local councils that provides clarity and consistency and enables the live music industry to thrive; and
• a review of regulation pertaining to traffic management of events, which are currently overly burdensome.

Other feedback emphasised that historic heritage/ cultural heritage should be retained as a matter of national importance through the resource management reform and other proposed legislative changes.

“The single biggest issue facing my particular area of involvement (music/sound) is resources. It is prohibitively expensive to operate venues for performance and other types of community engagement (e.g. workshops, recording, rehearsal spaces etc). This is a reflection of our badly distorted property market, exacerbated by our ludicrously cumbersome liquor and noise regulations.”

Action: Work across government to make maintaining and conserving heritage places simple and practical for owners, including a review of earthquake strengthening requirements.

Feedback on this action was predominantly from cultural heritage or regional organisations. Submitters outlined the costs and resources needed to engage with earthquake strengthening requirements and advocated for more simplified maintenance of heritage places that was nationally consistent.

Some feedback noted that many grassroots organisations operate from ageing facilities with expensive maintenance requirements, and that government investment in facility maintenance is required to safeguard these spaces for the future. A Wellington-based organisation commented that one of the most significant barriers to key performance spaces is the ongoing impact of earthquake strengthening requirements.

Some submitters asked for the scope of this action to be expanded to include the protection of archaeological sites and consideration for how these might be protected for the future, for example, vulnerable rock art sites.

Apart from streamlining regulation, submitters also advocated for owners of heritage places to be adequately supported, including through:

• subsidies for insurance of heritage buildings
• tax deductions for private owners of historic heritage places
• rates relief and support to cover compliance costs.

“The disruption caused by earthquake strengthening has long-lasting implications for our ability to grow and sustain a thriving cultural sector.”

Action: Modernise legislation administered by Manatū Taonga Ministry for Culture and Heritage so that it is fit for purpose and working effectively for the creative and cultural sectors, for example the Broadcasting Act 1989 and the application of Crown entity governance legislation.

The intent to modernise legislation and better position Crown entities was welcomed by many. Submitters called for the roles of Crown entities in the sector to be more clearly defined so New Zealand organisations and practitioners can be supported to connect to their audiences and navigate the funding process with more ease. Flexibility, accessibility, and the ability to keep up with evolving technologies were key traits respondents sought from Crown entities.

In terms of specific legislation which Manatū Taonga oversees, modernising the Protected Objects Act 1975 was cited as a key priority for submissions from the cultural heritage sector, who felt that this urgency should be reflected in Amplify.

There was strong advocacy from the screen sector for more equal regulatory responsibilities for local broadcast media (which are subject to a standards and complaints regime under parts one to three of the Broadcasting Act 1989) and social media and international streaming platforms, who do not need to adhere to the same standard. Submitters suggested this would support the Strategy’s aspirations for a vibrant domestic industry and high-quality creative and cultural exports. Submitters also advocated for clearer guidance around the complaints process and the responsibilities between industry bodies, regulators and the Courts.

The Media Reform discussion document, outlining five draft proposals to create modern media legislation for New Zealand’s media and content production sector was released on 12 February 2025. Submissions on Amplify were received before this discussion document was published.

Submitters cautioned against changing legislation that would result in further administration and compliance costs. Those changes would prevent innovation and the sector’s use of evolving technology.  

“The Broadcasting Act is over 25 years old and was enacted to contemplate the arrival of private television operators in New Zealand. In that time the Internet has become the single biggest platform for creation and delivery of visual content, yet while one sphere operates under regulation the other does not. The emergence of AI will only exacerbate the gap between current regulation and real-world application.”

Action: Provide support for cultural and creative practitioners and businesses to navigate the tax system, with a particular focus on those with complex income streams

Many submissions highlighted how creative and cultural practitioners often relied on contract work and had multiple income streams to support themselves. While not in scope of the Strategy, many submissions advocated for amendments to the tax system, which was viewed as overly complex and not facilitative of the fluctuating nature of the “gig economy”.

Tax changes advocated for by submitters included:

• a tax-free threshold for creative income below $20,000 NZD
• tax on high income earners and high profit businesses that goes towards creatives
• removal or reduction of GST on all box office/audience raised income  
• removal of secondary tax for creative contractors
• a cultural gifting scheme.

“For the many artists who have a separate source of primary income, paying higher secondary tax rates on often meagre creative earnings is a significant financial burden and makes it more difficult to grow those revenue streams into a viable primary source of income.”

“Supporting those creatives as small business owners to simplify processes and save time has the potential to make a positive contribution.”

Action: Support the creative and cultural sectors’ uptake of new technology, including responsible use and development of AI, and take a cross-government approach to address the opportunities and challenges of using AI in creative work.

There was concern that AI companies have already breached copyright laws and there was a lack of regulation around generative AI.

Submissions on behalf of musicians and the music industry cautioned that generative AI, when not used responsibly, presents substantial risk to the livelihood and mana of artists and the economic viability of New Zealand’s creative industries. Identified risks included AI companies using music without permission to train models and creating vocal clones impersonating and appropriating artists’ voice, image and likeness.

For many submitters saw protecting creatives’ IP as the top priority for government intervention around AI and the arts.

On the other hand, AI usage in the creative and cultural sectors was identified as having the potential to foster creativity and improve access for disabled people (as an example), enabling marginalised groups and individuals to participate in creative and cultural activities. It was also noted that imagination and innovation in New Zealand’s creative industries have developed internationally scaled games and virtual reality, and that AI offers opportunities to build on this.

Some organisations who supported this action, including councils, requested more detail to understand how the support and capability building required at a national level will be operationalised without additional investment.

Additional suggestions for how government can support the creative and cultural sector’ uptake of new technology included:

• pilot initiatives which test how AI can be utilised by creative industries
• requiring AI companies to specifically retain and disclose records of any New Zealand content used to train their models
• ensuring students gain exposure to the uses and risks of AI while in the education system
• examining the proactive action Australia has taken to regulate AI, with regulatory guardrails recently recommended by a Senate Committee.

“AI regulation should be a high priority for the government. Ensuring that productivity it is not at the expense of creative incomes – through a lack of copyright, data and privacy protections within AI models and global technology business practice.”

Action: Work across government to respond to intellectual property risks to creative and cultural works, including ngā toi Māori, with a focus on stopping misappropriation of cultural works

A key theme from feedback was the need to safeguard the IP of mātauranga Māori and ensure that tīkanga is respected when resolving IP conflicts. Some submitters found the statements under this action encouraging, especially in regard to generative AI using te reo Māori without permission or understanding, which was seen as a serious threat to taonga Māori. Some suggested that system-level changes are ensure that the IP of artists are recognised and protected.

There was some advocacy for shared service models for arts administration and specialist knowledge like IP, copyright, AI, which could help to increase capability (at lower cost) for artists and arts organisations.

Some respondents noted they would welcome a more thorough explanation of how copyright law will protect New Zealand’s indigenous arts, intellectual and cultural property so they are not appropriated and devalued. The work of WAI262 was described as “hugely important”, and commenters said they would like to see Amplify better align with this work. [2]

Feedback noted that improving recognition of cultural IP is expected to result in economic gains through greater market share and confidence in the production of creative and cultural works. This will also strengthen the regulatory frameworks’ ability to prevent fakes and forgeries. Similar work is underway in Australia and submissions pointed to legislation in the United States which seeks to protect cultural IP and heritage.

“Intellectual property frameworks are a western construct and are often at odds with te ao Māori.”

“We welcome an open and proactive response to the Wai262 treaty claim to uphold our responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi with regards to indigenous intellectual property and Mātauranga Māori.”

Action: Explore initiatives to support increased investment in and access to local screen content

Submissions from the screen sector welcomed this action, reiterating the value of making local screen content more accessible to New Zealand audiences and the sector’s role in nurturing national identity. Investment in local screen content would lead to an increased New Zealand presence internationally, which would in turn provide sustainable career opportunities. Investment was interpreted differently by submitters; while many desired financial support, investment to build entrepreneurship or leverage relationships with global streamers to engage with New Zealand audiences was also welcomed.

Those from other sectors felt that specific reference to the screen sector prevented this action from being relevant to other creative and cultural endeavours. Submitters felt that this action should be expanded to include other forms of content, especially music, as their globally competitive environment mirrors that of the screen sector.

Initiatives which submitters thought could support this action’s intentions included:

• a quota requiring global streaming platforms to showcase a certain percentage of New Zealand content
• a levy on international streamers and production companies operating in New Zealand that is used to support local film and TV production
• increased screening of New Zealand content on broadcast and digital New Zealand channels
• requiring New Zealand screen content to use New Zealand music (if this action was extended to the music sector as well).

Some submitters outlined how the New Zealand Screen Production Rebate (the Rebate) was integral to attracting third-party investment, developing new industry talent and facilitating tourism. There were some suggestions about how to ease access and simplify requirements for the Rebate.

“In a globalised world, New Zealanders need to see their own unique culture and creativity on screen…The support of this voice and the raft of creative and technical skills that bring it to screen, are a strategic advantage in a global marketplace.”

“Many countries have implemented quotas or levies to keep local operators afloat. New Zealand does not. There should be no if's, but's or maybe's now - The Government needs to regulate the Streamers if it wants a vibrant local industry to export.”

Other key themes and topics raised

Diversity and inclusion

A significant amount of feedback discussed issues concerning diversity, inclusion, access, and equity in the creative and cultural sectors. There was considerable support for initiatives to support and engage traditionally underrepresented, marginalised or vulnerable groups including Māori, youth, Pasifika, disabled, ethnic, rural/regional and LGBTQ+ communities, and people with mental health issues.

For example, some submitters advocated for more explicit commitment to equitable access and participation for disabled artists, and for disabled people to access, participate in and engage with creative and cultural activities and ngā toi Māori.

Respondents sought to understand whether the Strategy would honour te ao Māori, how much of a voice Māori have had in its development, and how the Strategy fits with the strategies and aspirations of iwi/ hapū and groups representing Māori interests.

“My main concerns are around what isn't referenced - namely, historically marginalised and underrepresented communities. This includes ethnic communities, disabled communities, youth, and other diverse perspectives. These communities are already invisible enough.”

Raising sector incomes

Some respondents thought the Strategy’s goal of improving the median income for creative professionals was a step in the right direction and hoped this signalled a willingness to support artists, creatives and cultural practitioners in all their diversity.

Some questioned how the Strategy would actually raise incomes, and thought more detail was required about how creative professionals can earn and be valued more.

Submissions highlighted inequities for Māori and early career artists. They suggested support for emerging and younger artists would create more success on the world stage and a more sustainable sector and incomes in the long term. Some commented that there are few opportunities for emerging artists, and many of them are poorly paid or unpaid, which drives artists overseas.

Several submitters advocated for a Universal Basic Income (UBI) for artists, pointing to the success of Ireland’s UBI pilot scheme.

“How does this strategy actually deliver on ensuring the people in creative industries (not many of which offer the stability of full or part time salary or wages) are effectively remunerated for their contribution to our arts, museum, design and cultural sectors?”

Multi-faceted value of investing in the creative and cultural sectors

A significant proportion of feedback discussed the breadth and depth of ways that cultural and creative activity generates value for all New Zealanders. Some survey respondents advised that they supported some of the actions, not because they perceived the actions would be of benefit to them or their immediate community, but because they thought there would be overall benefit for New Zealand’s future.

“The arts support wellbeing, community connection, resilient individuals and communities, understanding across cultures and divergent views, blossoming of individuals and much more. The role of ngā toi Māori cannot be ignored in the global impact stakes.”

Scope, language and focus of the Strategy

Many submissions were in broad agreement with the Strategy’s intentions and saw themselves represented in the actions and vision statement. However, some sectors and groups felt excluded from the scope of Amplify and by association, government support. These submitters felt that Amplify neglected to understand their specific needs or align with the intentions of their creative and cultural endeavours. There were also critiques that Amplify was too broad and does not provide enough specificity on how the actions would achieve envisioned outcomes or tangibly benefit the creative and cultural sectors.

A consistent thread connecting many submissions was that the Strategy was too focused on output and skill development, leading to an overemphasis on economic outcomes. Some found terms like “amplify” and “powerhouse” vague and unclear.

Submitters felt that the use of “talent” in the pillar “Nurturing Talent” did not adequately reflect the importance of amateur engagement with creative and cultural activity and called for greater inclusion of community arts. Similarly, “growth” in the pillar “Reducing Barriers to Growth” was argued by some as neglectful of the barriers faced by practitioners with objectives other than turning a profit.

Some feedback suggested the pillars’ contents seemed more like work programme tasks than strategic ambitions.

Amplify consultation process and strategy implementation

Submitters had questions, comments and suggestions about opportunities for ongoing engagement with Strategy. These included how sectors and organisations can continue to be involved in its development, and how to create a streamlined process for submitting proposals seeking to further the initiatives and goals set out in the Strategy.

Footnotes

[1] The Creatives in Schools programme funded schools and kura to partner with progressional artists and creative practitioners to share their knowledge and practice with students and ākonga.

[2] Wai262 is a claim registered with the Waitangi Tribunal that exampled the Crown’s policies and laws that impact indigenous knowledge and taonga, including indigenous flora and fauna, the environment, Māori culture and the products of Māori culture.

Next steps

This feedback is currently informing further development of the Creative and Cultural Strategy. Cabinet decisions are expected in June 2025 with a view to publishing a final version of the Strategy in July 2025.

In finalising the Strategy, an implementation plan and evaluation framework will be established to monitor the progress and delivery of actions.