A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding the funding and subsequent withdrawal of funding for the film 'Two Fists One Heart'. The questions probe the information provided to the minister, the scrutiny applied, and the reasons for the funding reversal.

AnsweredQoN 350Legislative Council
Asked
21 June 2005
Portfolio
Arts

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to the minister funding and then withdrawing funding for the feature film Two Fists One Heart . (1) What details were provided by ScreenWest to the minister prior to her signing off on the funding of the film by ScreenWest? (2) Were Rai Fazio’s fees and the federal funding detailed in the ScreenWest funding approval? (3) Did the minister scrutinise the funding? (4) Will the minister table the documents provided to her prior to her approval of the ScreenWest funding agreement? (5) Is it required that the minister must sign off on any ScreenWest funding in excess of $50 000? (6) Why did the minister approve and then subsequently withdraw the ScreenWest funding? (7) Does a film company that produces a commercially successful film have to pay back the seed capital given as initial funding by ScreenWest? Hon KATE DOUST

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(1) What details were provided by ScreenWest to the minister prior to her signing off on the funding of the film by ScreenWest? (2) Were Rai Fazio’s fees and the federal funding detailed in the ScreenWest funding approval? (3) Did the minister scrutinise the funding? (4) Will the minister table the documents provided to her prior to her approval of the ScreenWest funding agreement? (5) Is it required that the minister must sign off on any ScreenWest funding in excess of $50 000? (6) Why did the minister approve and then subsequently withdraw the ScreenWest funding? (7) Does a film company that produces a commercially successful film have to pay back the seed capital given as initial funding by ScreenWest? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(2) Were Rai Fazio’s fees and the federal funding detailed in the ScreenWest funding approval? (3) Did the minister scrutinise the funding? (4) Will the minister table the documents provided to her prior to her approval of the ScreenWest funding agreement? (5) Is it required that the minister must sign off on any ScreenWest funding in excess of $50 000? (6) Why did the minister approve and then subsequently withdraw the ScreenWest funding? (7) Does a film company that produces a commercially successful film have to pay back the seed capital given as initial funding by ScreenWest? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(3) Did the minister scrutinise the funding? (4) Will the minister table the documents provided to her prior to her approval of the ScreenWest funding agreement? (5) Is it required that the minister must sign off on any ScreenWest funding in excess of $50 000? (6) Why did the minister approve and then subsequently withdraw the ScreenWest funding? (7) Does a film company that produces a commercially successful film have to pay back the seed capital given as initial funding by ScreenWest? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(4) Will the minister table the documents provided to her prior to her approval of the ScreenWest funding agreement? (5) Is it required that the minister must sign off on any ScreenWest funding in excess of $50 000? (6) Why did the minister approve and then subsequently withdraw the ScreenWest funding? (7) Does a film company that produces a commercially successful film have to pay back the seed capital given as initial funding by ScreenWest? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(5) Is it required that the minister must sign off on any ScreenWest funding in excess of $50 000? (6) Why did the minister approve and then subsequently withdraw the ScreenWest funding? (7) Does a film company that produces a commercially successful film have to pay back the seed capital given as initial funding by ScreenWest? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(6) Why did the minister approve and then subsequently withdraw the ScreenWest funding? (7) Does a film company that produces a commercially successful film have to pay back the seed capital given as initial funding by ScreenWest? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(7) Does a film company that produces a commercially successful film have to pay back the seed capital given as initial funding by ScreenWest? Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
Hon KATE DOUST replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(1) ScreenWest provided the following information to the minister: the summary of the project, including synopsis, proposed ScreenWest finance and key creative personnel; the total budget figure, including details of government financing partners; and board minutes, including its recommendation. (2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(2) No information was provided by ScreenWest on Rai Fazio’s fees. However, the advice included details on the federal Film Finance Corporation funding; that is, the FFC would fund 40 per cent of the budget. It was only when the minister subsequently asked questions that further information was supplied on the fee structure. (3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(3) Yes. (4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(4) Yes, to the extent that these documents may be released under the Freedom of Information Act or as otherwise required by law. (5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(5) Yes. (6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(6) Once additional information came to hand, it became apparent that the state government’s investment risk was far greater than that being undertaken by other individuals associated with the project. (7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.
(7) Yes, once the film enters production; however, the funding in question was not seed funding.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more