| Media | Brian Rosen, July 2006 |

Brian Rosen the CEO of the FFC was kind enough to attend our meeting and talk about the industry at a Federal level. We had several questions prepared for him.

Q1. In this year’s budget, more than a month ago, the Federal Government announced that a major review of Australian film funding will be released in October. More than a month after the budget, why is there still no announcement about the scope and terms of reference of this review?

A1. Brian Rosen said that the terms of reference will be ready early July: it has been held up as the Department of Finance has an input into the terms.


Q2. Can the FFC clarify its position on the future role of FLIC’s? Is FFC looking at other ways of funding Australian film and TV production?

A2. At this stage, FLIC's has not raised the full $10M but it still has 2 weeks to go. BR said that it is very difficult to find private investors since they received very little advantage from their investment.


Q3. Would the FFC support a levy on cinema ticket sales (like France) to help fund Australian feature film productions?

A3. No. BR believes the Government would not embrace this idea. The French have a unique system even in Europe. However, BR has met with the Federation of European Agencies and said that the FFC would be happy to make those notes available to the Group.


Q4. Does the FFC have a future film makers’ policy regarding the role of HD (high definition) film production?

A4. BR said that the FFC had no policy to encourage HD, it was up to the film-makers; however, he did give an example of the cost of shoots: "Jindabyne" for $13M and "Wolf Creek" for $1.5M is one example of the effect of moving from film to HD.


Q5. Is this a genuine way of reducing costs for Australian film productions?

A5. BR believes that HD is not always cheaper than film, as director's tended to shoot more. However, he did say that the reduction in cost between shoots was more than just HD: the good mental approach by producers/directors and script writers of smaller budget films helped, as did, tight scheduling and, of course, smaller crews.  BR believes that the increased size of crews on low budget independent films in Australia, (under $5M) has made them unviable. US independent films are cheaper, because they vary the crew sizes on a daily and needs basis.


Q6. How has the FFC’s budget fared in real terms over the last 10 years (ie CPI, inflationary pressures)?

A6. BR said that every year the FFC has quarterly funding meetings with the Federal Government. Currently, their budget is approximately $70M per annum. However, this figure generates a lot more in production worth; for example, the $70M that the FFC gets is roughly split into - $40M for film, which generates $80M worth of production; $15M for adult TV drama, which generates $40M worth of production, $15M for Children’s Drama which generates $30M worth of production and $10M for docos, which generates $18M worth of production.

(Asked what was meant by "generating production"), BR explained that for every dollar the FFC invested it created a $2.50 spend on production. Further, the FFC investment is only part of the total budget of productions with further funds coming from a range of sources (other agencies, broadcasters, distributors and the private sector) to provide the total budgets invested in production.


Q7. Regarding the Australian film industry, what is the future of Government funding to be?

A7. BR said, "It is up to our industry to demonstrate to the Federal Government why our industry is worth supporting."


Back to Media Page.