3. National Institutions
   1. The following chapter discusses how the National Institutions convey Australia’s story. It examines digital accessibility of collections, access to collections for rural and regional communities, and collaboration between the National Institutions.

Remote access

3.2Visitors to the National Capital can explore a range of important cultural institutions and exhibitions that tell Australia’s story. However, not every Australian can visit Canberra and its institutions. With growing technological advances, there are opportunities for all Australians to experience online the resources available through the National Institutions.

3.3In 2021–22, 5.3 million people visited the National Institutions either in person or online. This included 3.3 million visits to National Institution buildings and 2 million visits online.[1]

3.4The proportion of objects available to the public online has increased. In the 2017–18 financial year, 1.1 million objects were digitised. In the 2021–22 financial year, this grew to 2.5million objects.[2]

3.5The importance of digital access to the National Institutions was raised throughout the inquiry, with several of the National Institutions highlighting the number of visitors accessing resources and information digitally. Dr Marie-Louise Ayres, Director-General of the National Library of Australia (NLA) advised that within the building there is approximately 300 kilometres of shelving for physical resources and petabytes for digital material. Dr Ayres added that for every person who is served in the building, 80 to 90 are served digitally.[3]

3.6In the past financial year close to eight million users accessed online resources through the National Museum of Australia (NMA).[4] The NMA noted that it has online engagement with more than 10 times the number of people who visit the NMA in person. It stated that:

…this capability, to bring our collections and heritage assets to the people, effectively engages people with the idea of nation and encourages them to connect their online visit to a physical visit to the values that the city represents. The expansion of this digital engagement, through investment in digitising and making available the collections of the National Institutions, has the potential to connect Canberra to people across the continent and around the world.[5]

3.7Similarly, there were over 607,000 visits to the Museum of Australian Democracy (MoAD) website in the 2022–23 financial year. More than 40,000 visits were from regional and rural Australian locations. This comprises 9.9 per cent of MoAD’s Australian website visitation.[6]

3.8When considering digital engagement with regional, rural, and remote communities, the National Gallery of Australia (NGA) noted that ‘24 per cent of visitors to the NGA’s website are from regional areas of Australia’.[7]

3.9Mr Patrick McIntyre, Chief Executive Officer of the National Film and Sound Archive of Australia (NFSA), stated that while its capacity to analyse where audiences are from needs some development, the NSFA can ‘see that, even digitally, we skew towards the Sydney–Canberra corridor because a lot of marketing of the institution over the years has been based on visiting us in Canberra, so we skew towards that Sydney–Canberra corridor.[8]

3.10Mr McIntyre added that the NFSA had recently launched a streaming platform, which was marketed to cities like Adelaide and Brisbane. As a result, the NFSA saw triple the usual visitation to their website from these cities. Over the coming years, the NFSA plans to invest in systems that enable it to target services to different areas. This would create digital first experiences for people in communities outside of the Sydney–Canberra corridor.[9]

3.11The National Archives of Australia (NAA) Director-General, Mr Simon Froude, acknowledged the limitations of archival institutions traditionally being in capital cities in the States and Territories. To increase access to records the NAA has initiated a program of digitisation. The NAA aims to digitise between 20 and 30 per cent of its collection over the next 10 years. It was noted that digitisation allows for the preservation of at-risk records, as well as equitable access. With digitisation, material will be made available across the country rather than just capital cities.[10]

Regional, rural, and remote communities

3.12Most visitors to National Capital’s National Institutions—whether in person or online—tend to be from Australia’s major cities. In 2021–22, Australian visitors to the National Institution buildings included 87.1 per cent from major cities, 12.7 per cent from inner and outer regional communities, and 0.2 per cent from remote and very remote communities.[11] Of Australian visitors to National Institution websites, 61.8 per cent were from major cities, 36.2 per cent were from inner and outer regional communities, and 2.0 per cent were from remote and very remote communities.[12]

3.13The Committee was informed of several initiatives undertaken by the National Institutions to ensure regional and rural communities have access to their exhibits. Inparticular, the National Institutions identified touring exhibitions as their primary outreach program.

3.14The Committee heard there is a need to improve collection and exhibit access to communities outside Australia’s major cities. Current programs that provide access to regional, rural, and remote communities include the Visions of Australia program and the National Collecting Institutions Touring and Outreach (NCITO) program.

3.15The Visions of Australia program provides funding to support the development and touring of quality exhibitions to regional and remote Australia by Australian arts and cultural organisations. Funding of approximately $2.7 million is available each year across two funding rounds. In the first round of 2023, the NGA was the only National Institution to receive funding.[13]

3.16The NCITO program aims to increase touring by Australian national institutions so that Australian and overseas cultural material is accessible to all Australians, especially regional communities. Funding of $1 million is available each year. Several National Institutions have received funding in the 2023–24 financial year.[14]

3.17Through the NGA’s Sharing the National Collection Program, regional galleries and centres can borrow works from the national collection. As an example, Monet’s Haystacks will be going to the Tweed Regional Gallery. Additionally, over 50 expressions of interests have been provided by galleries and organisations across the country seeking to borrow works.[15]

3.18The NGA has approximately seven exhibitions that travel to regional, rural, remote, and metropolitan venues. Each year a new exhibit is added to the program, and one is retired. Additionally, the NGA has four art cases that travel to regional, rural, and remote communities. The art cases are designed to go to community centres, retirement villages, schools, and libraries. This program has been privately funded for 20 years. There is demand for the program, particularly in regional, rural, and remote communities, who may not have the infrastructure to accommodate a loan from the national collection.[16]

3.19When considering the limitations of touring exhibitions, Dr Mitzevich, Director of the NGA, stated that the NGA is not funded specifically in a recurrent way for touring exhibitions. Funding through Visions of Australia was noted as essential for the NGA’s touring program. However, Dr Mitzevich suggested that in future it would be beneficial for touring programs to be included in core funding.[17]

3.20Currently, the National Portrait Gallery of Australia (NPGA) has a tiered travelling exhibition that is aimed at facilities that can manage collections. The Director of the NPGA, Ms Bree Pickering, advised that new funding is being invested in the traveling exhibition outreach program to expand it to suburban, regional, rural, and remote areas. Ms Pickering noted that these facilities may not be able to hold a whole exhibition but might be able to take a single portrait.[18]

3.21The NLA—the largest loaner of library material in Australia—works with Australia’s public libraries to ensure access to its collections beyond the National Capital. DrAyres added that following COVID the NLA introduced a Digital First program for interlibrary loans. This program allows individuals to request digital copies of items held by the NLA through their local library.[19]

3.22Director of MoAD, Ms Stephanie Bull, noted ‘the need for MoAD to extend its outreach more broadly, by touring content and programming throughout remote, regional and metropolitan towns’. This would enable all Australians access to the nationally significant collection at Old Parliament House. Ms Bull stated that recent program funding enabled a tour of National Gallery collections to regions across Australia and suggested that this type of funding program could be expanded to all national collecting institutions.[20]

3.23Ms Bull added that MoAD has an annual exhibit, Behind the Lines, that tours four or five different venues a year. This touring exhibition is supported by additional government grants. Ms Bull argued that the exhibit should visit more than four of five venues, it should be an experience that is able to go to every state and territory.[21]

3.24MrMatthew Anderson, Director of the AWM acknowledged the importance of every Australian having access to the AWM. Outreach beyond the capital cities to rural and regional Australia was recognised as crucial to the AWM as it is ‘everyone’s memorial.’[22]

3.25National touring programs were supported in the October 2022–23 Budget with an investment of $10 million to extend Questacon’s Education Outreach. This ensures young Australians, families, and educators living in diverse regional, rural and remote communities can continue to access high quality local science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) resources and activities.[23]

3.26In January 2023, the Commonwealth Government announced its new national cultural policy, Revive: a place for every story, a story for every place (Revive). Revive is a five-year plan to renew and revive Australia's arts, entertainment, and cultural sector and will provide an additional $199 million in funding from 2023–24.[24] Some key measures include:

• Sharing the national collection by establishing a program of long-term loans of works from the National Gallery of Australia's collection to regional and suburban cultural institutions across Australia.
• Increasing support for regional arts and culture through an increase to the Regional Arts Fund.
• Supporting specialist in-school arts education programs that directly draw from cultural and creative sector expertise, focusing on areas of identified disadvantage.
• Modernising and extending the Public and Educational Lending Right Scheme to include digital content under the scheme.[25]

Current collaborative approaches

3.27The National Capital Authority (NCA) is responsible for fostering an awareness of the National Capital. Thisincludes the NCA supporting National Institutions through:

• Designing the NCA website to act as an entry portal to the National Institutions.
• Providing a digital map of attractions and institutions which provides direct links to each of the National Institutions for use during visits.
• Development of open spaces surrounding the National Institutions which help link one institution with another, including wayfinding signage.
• Participation in coordination and networking across the National Institutions.
• Taking a leading role to connect cultural institutions with one another and sparking collaboration.
• Contributing to several joint initiatives and projects such as the Cultural Icons campaign.[26]
  28. The NCA shared with the Committee collaborative initiatives undertaken by the NCA and the National Institutions. Mr Hamid Heydarian, Acting Chief Executive of the NCA, informed the Committee of the Tourism Advisory Forum in which all National Institutions and a range of organisations come together to exchange ideas. MrHeydarian also raised the meeting of senior executives of cultural collecting and exhibiting agencies who meet three times a year to discuss operational issues.[27] MrAdam Robbins, Director of Visitor Experience, Marketing, and Events, for the NCA, also noted the role taken on by the NCA as connector and coordinator for collaboration between the National Institutions.[28]
  29. Ms Kareena Arthy, Deputy Director-General of Economic Development, ACT Government, highlighted the benefits of promoting the National Capital as a collective and encouraged more collective work between the ACT Government and the National Institutions to promote the Canberra experience.[29]
  30. Ms Arthy provided examples of current collaborative approaches, including the Cultural Icons campaign in which the National Institutions have come together to ‘promote the essence of the experience that people have when they come to visit Canberra and engage with the national attractions’.[30] The Major Events Fund was also raised as a collaboration between the ACT Government and the National Institutions. It was noted that the contribution of the Major Events Fund to the economy has been more than a $1 billion to date.[31]
  31. The National Institutions also identified several collaborative approaches including the Strengthening Democracy Taskforce. Established under the Department of Home Affairs, MoAD, the NLA and the NAA work with the Australian Public Service, universities, and not‑for‑profit sectors. Through this collaboration, public understanding is deepened, misinformation and disinformation are addressed, and Australia’s democracy is strengthened.[32]
  32. The Australian National Botanic Gardens (ANBG) noted that it has ‘established cooperative relationships with like-minded National Institutions in Canberra’.[33] This includes the NMA, Questacon, and the NLA. Collaboration includes exchange of display materials and education activities, as well as participation on advisory committees.[34]
  33. The NMA described several collaborative approaches to provide a combined cultural experience including the Cultural Icons campaign. It stated:

[T]he Museum has taken a leadership role in driving the Cultural Icons marketing program, in combination with other participating National Institutions. Developed with grant funding from Visit Canberra, the Museum and the other partners have sought to foster a wider public sense of the collective cultural offering to visitors in Canberra. Moreover, through its support of other collaborative work, such as the free-ride bus service between the major cultural institutions initially established and run by the Museum with support from many of our colleagues, the Museum has sought to develop this sense of the combined value of the cultural experience of the nation’s capital.[35]

3.34The NMA also noted that the new National Cultural Policy, Revive, establishes a strong foundation for National Institutions to build a collective meaning and identity of Australia.[36]

3.35Funding challenges were identified as an obstacle to achieving further and sustained success. Existing programs and campaigns include the:

• National Capital Education Tourism Project.
• Bookings Canberra Excursions.
• Parliamentary and Civics Education Rebate Program.
• Cultural Icons Campaign.[37]

Other collaborations

3.36National Institutions including the NFSA, the ANBG, and Questacon identified avenues of collaboration beyond the National Institutions, including collaborating with organisations with similar areas of expertise.

3.37The NFSA Chief Executive Officer, Mr Patrick McIntyre, advised that the NFSA also collaborates with Screen Australia, the Australian Film Television and Radio School, National Institute of Dramatic Arts, and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.[38]

3.38Both representatives from Questacon and the ANBG noted that they have collaborated with other scientific institutions across the National Capital. Questacon and the ANBG have collaborated with one another, as well as the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). The ANBG also works closely with other botanic gardens around Australia through joint or shared conservation programs.[39]

3.39In its submission, the ANBG stated that it collaborates extensively, nationally and internationally. This collaboration includes providing representation on the international taxonomic community. The ANBG also plays a role in the implementation of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation and the Global Taxonomy Initiative.[40]

3.40Questacon identified national collaboration through the Inspiring Australia Network. The Inspiring Australia Network is a group ‘where key stakeholders and collaborators are connected to strengthen the STEM ecosystem and amplify the impact of STEM initiatives and activities in communities across Australia’.[41] Beyond collaboration with the National Institutions, Questacon highlighted opportunities to connect with other science infrastructure across the Capital. By connecting these assets together, the National Capital could offer tourism experiences with a focus on contemporary science and a natural history focus.[42]

3.41The NLA advised the Committee that it partners with approximately 900 organisations across Australia through its Trove Collaborative Services. Partners consist of 327 public libraries, as well as cultural organisations. In 2022–23, 18,770 resources were shared with public libraries through this service.[43]

Potential collaborative approaches

3.42Beyond current collaboration between the National Institutions and other entities, the Committee received evidence regarding other potential collaborative approaches. It was argued that these approaches could improve the collective marketing of the National Institutions to potential visitors to the Capital.

3.43President of the National Capital Attractions Association (NCAA), Dr Tristan Hoffmeister, recommended a single platform for the National Institutions to provide a collective connected experience. Investment in this platform could allow the National Institutions to make their collections available online as a one-stop shop for Australians.[44]

3.44Dr Hoffmeister advised the Committee that a joint platform is only one aspect of improved collaboration. Incentivising collaboration is another aspect of improved collaboration that needs to be met. Dr Hoffmeister noted that there is not an emphasis on a singular cultural experience in Canberra. To achieve a single cultural experience, the National Institutions need to be connected to the platform. One option raised was to provide collective funding to incentivise the National Institutions to work together. Another option was the incorporation of a body to bring the National Institutions together at a higher level.[45]

3.45Dr Trinca also recognised the potential for a collaborative marketing approach rather than individual funding for the National Institutions to campaign separately. Dr Trinca suggested that a campaign encouraging Australians to see the cultural value and experiences of the National Capital would be money well spent.[46]

3.46As an example, Dr Hoffmeister noted that 71 per cent of visitors to the NPGA also visit another attraction when in the Capital. Dr Hoffmeister argued that visitors come to the National Capital for an experience and not to visit one institution. Visitors may be looking for a certain theme or area of interest. To better facilitate the needs of visitors, better connection between the National Institutions across themes, interests, identities, and Australian culture was recommended to provide access to multiple collections within a visit to the Capital.[47]

3.47The NCAA recommended the establishment of a single ticketing system for the National Institutions located in the National Capital. This approach would provide an exhibition booking system using one platform, rather than visitors going to each institutions page to book tickets.[48] Similarly, Dr Trinca suggested a joint ticket and a summer series ticket particularly for when the National Institutions may have paid exhibitions. Furthermore, Dr Trinca proposed a collaborative series ticket that would act as a co-program for the National Institutions to come together to provide a shared or complimentary program during peak visiting times.[49]

3.48Director of Questacon, Ms Jo White, responded to the possibility of having a Canberra ticket or pass to assist visitors in wayfinding between the different National Institutions. Ms White observed that connecting the National Institutions is an improvement on each institution thinking and working in their own way.[50]

3.49The inclusion of a Canberra pass was welcomed by the Chair of the Leaders Forum, Dr Marshall, who noted that the National Capital does not do packaging well.[51] General Manager of the ANBG, Mr Peter Byron suggested that a Canberra ticket option would work well for the National Institutions that have an entry charge.[52]

3.50Mr Froude, Director-General of the NAA, identified the potential for cultural tours as a form of collaboration between the National Institutions:

There are ideas around being able to bring people together through cultural tours that are designed to take people through the various cultural institutions over a series of days. We're looking at attracting people who might stay in Canberra for three or four days, on a cultural tour of those institutions, where they could see a couple of institutions a day. That means people are staying in the Canberra region and bringing money into the economy as well as visiting the cultural institutions.[53]

3.51The NCAA recommended the appointment of a Special Minister of State for Citizenship and Cultural Engagement to ensure the activities of the National Institutions are coordinated and supported.[54]

A united voice

3.52One of the National Capital’s strengths is that it is the repository for the country’s collections. Dr Nick Mitzevich, Director of the NGA, suggested elevating that understanding and promoted the opportunities and benefits to positioning Canberra as the home of the greatest cultural collections in Australia.[55]

3.53Evidence highlighted the potential of institutions to provide visitors with a united story on particular interests and themes throughout multiple National Institutions. For example, Ms Pickering, Director of NPGA, acknowledged that the National Institutions each hold part of the national collection which could be linked to provide a tailored experience for visitors. Ms Pickering explained:

I think there's also a lot of potential. While each of us hold part of the national collection, it is still the national collection. So where are the linkages that we can make in there? Are there ways for us to link our collections online? Are there ways for people to not have to dig really deeply in a specific place to find the natural stories that flow through? The Portrait Gallery of course holds people, and people are connected to everything that we do. You can come and see a famous scientist in the Portrait Gallery and then go and find their archive in the National Archives or a book about them in the library. You could tailor a whole experience around your one interest in a single person. The natural connections are there, and it's just about what infrastructure we require and how we invest in our digital infrastructure and physical infrastructure in the Parliamentary Triangle to make this holistic experience that people can then use their curiosity to navigate. [56]

3.54Mr Anderson, Director of the AWM, noted that the AWM has 40,000 works of art including portraits. Mr Anderson suggested the AWM could make those portraits available to the NPGA when they are having a particular exhibition and added that those kinds of considerations represent a ‘very clever collaboration of content where we can tell the very broad story that is Australia’.[57]

3.55Secretary of the Department of Parliamentary Services, Mr Rob Stefanic, observed that currently there is a focus on individual institutions and how they attract their own visitors. Mr Stefanic acknowledged that visitors usually visit several institutions or engage in several cultural activities, and identified the potential for a narrative to be created for those seeking a thematic basis for their visit.[58]

3.56Mr Jonathan Kobus, Executive Branch Manager of Visit Canberra, similarly noted that:

In the sense of greater collaboration, there is always room to enhance the way in which we can get the attractions understanding the value of the collective approach and the opportunity to think about a single message that goes to the market around Canberra as a place to visit for the cultural experience and whatever else is on offer in the Capital.[59]

Parliament and Civics Education Rebate Program

3.57In 2021–22, there were 3,208 school visits to the National Institutions, 306,645 public program visits and 1,691,971 student program visits.[60]

3.58Included in some school visits is the Parliament and Civics Education Rebate (PACER) program. PACER provides financial assistance to support students to visit the National Capital to undertake educational programs at selected National Institutions.[61]

3.59In 2021, the Commonwealth Government increased the rebate for school children travelling to Canberra by 50 per cent. In March of 2023, this increased rebate was extended until the end of 2023.

3.60Additional loadings to PACER were announced in 2023. These additional loadings aim to assist outer regional, remote, and very remote schools, and schools with an Index of Community and Socio-Economic Advantage (ICSEA) score under 1000. Changes were also made to the rebate based on zones, which can be seen in figure3.1.

Source: Parliament and Civics Education Rebate

3.61Mandatory institutions that schools must visit under the PACER program include MoAD, the National Electoral Education Centre, the AWM, and Parliament House. Alternative institutions, if mandatory institutions are fully booked, include Government House, the High Court of Australia, the NAA, the NPGA, the NMA, and the NCA.[62]

3.62Student visitor numbers for some institutions were shared with the Committee and are set out below as follows:

• In the last financial year, 95,900 schoolchildren visited the AWM. In one day, 738 school children visit the AWM and 58 visit the Last Post ceremony.[63]
• Approximately 80,000 students visit MoAD each year. Ms Stephanie Bull, Director, MoAD, noted that the demand to visit MoAD is greater and an increase in operational funding, as well as a permanent increase in the PACER program would allow more schools to visit.[64]
• Last year, 7,500 students visited the NAA, with 140 to 150 individual school programs.[65]
  63. Several of the National Institutions that are not part of the PACER program provide individual school programs. The NLA advised that it has a small onsite school visitation program. This facilitates approximately 10,000 students a year. In addition to the onsite program, a digital classroom is provided, which has approximately 900,000 users a year.[66]
  64. Chief Executive Officer of the NFSA, Mr Patrick McIntyre, noted that the NFSA was not part of the PACER program but is part of the collaborative marketing platform used by schools and visitors planning their visit to Canberra. In September, the NFSA had 3,000 students from across Australia booked. Mr McIntyre added that there has been a focus on media literacy education, which is gaining a high profile and increasing importance to the curriculum.[67]
  65. Questacon is not a mandatory attraction through the PACER program; however, many schools add a visit to Questacon as part of their program. It was noted that 150,000 school children visit Questacon on school excursions every year.[68]
  66. Approximately 17,000 students visit the ANBG each year. The ANBG is not part of the PACER program and is considered a secondary visit for schools. The ANBG is trying to offer night-time tours, because school tours are usually packed attending the compulsory PACER institutions.[69]
  67. The Parliamentary Education Officer (PEO) is not a mandatory PACER institution. However, it does deliver parliamentary education services on behalf of the Australian Parliament. These services include an immersive role-play program, video conferencing programs, as well as outreach programs. Since 1988, more than 2.4 million students have participated in a PEO program at Parliament House.[70]
  68. Noting that several of the National Institutions are not part of the PACER program, stakeholders advocated for the expansion of the PACER program to incorporate them.
  69. Over the last five years Dr Nick Mitzevich, Director, NGA, has advocated for the widening of the PACER program. Dr Mitzevich identified art galleries and museums for inclusion as a compulsory destination, noting the inclusion as a ‘way of demonstrating to the wider public that we as a society value arts and culture in the way that we might experience the world’. DrMitzevich stated:

With a simple policy change of widening the mandatory scope of the PACER program, we can do a number of things. First, we can elevate the significance that art and culture has in the society that we live in. Second, we can activate our institutions to do more heavy lifting with learning while students are in Canberra. Third, we can develop long-term relationships, because our data shows that if someone visits the gallery, they have a 60 per cent chance of returning. It's really that first step in that is the most difficult and the most impactful.[71]

3.70The NMA argued that ‘as a keeper of the nation’s story in material terms, with a remit that ranges across the great breadth of our story’,[72] there is logic in the NMA being a compulsory destination for a PACER visit. The extension of the PACER program to include the NMA and other National Institutions would add to the opportunities available to students.[73]

3.71The NPGA echoed similar views on expanding the PACER program to include arts and cultural institutions as mandatory destinations in the PACER program. MsPickering explained that engagement with arts and cultural institutions at a young age increased the likelihood of lifelong engagement.[74]

3.72The Director of Access and Learning for the NPGA informed the Committee that the National Institutions at the compulsory first tier of the PACER program are experiencing capacity issues to meet demand. It was recommended that additional National Institutions be incorporated into the first tier to provide more access for schools. Consideration of learning themes or curriculum links to collections was also raised as a benefit of visiting students in addition to civics and citizenship.[75]

3.73A dedicated program that focuses on science and technology was identified as an avenue for engaging students in those fields in the future. Questacon noted that ‘the opportunity to have a dedicated program that focuses on that and equips students, in terms of them feeling more confident with science and technology, will actually help potential engagement with those fields in the future.[76]

3.74The NAA told the Committee of the importance of ensuring students understand their roles as active citizens. The NAA observed that the role the NAA plays as an integrity and accountability organisation, as well as a cultural organisation, allows it to support the citizen centric view. The NAA recommended that the PACER program be expanded, and the tiering system be reviewed to see if there was a model that could support smaller institutions with less capacity.[77]

3.75Mr Garry Watson AM, Project Leader for the National Capital Educational Tourism Project, highlighted that the distinction between compulsory and optional institutions caused some constraints around the overall program. Mr Watson pointed out that some of the compulsory institutions are over utilised and do not have the capacity to manage the demand.[78]

3.76When considering the scope of PACER, the President of the National Capital Attractions Association stated that:

If we can expand PACER out from the mandatory institutions or attractions, that would give the opportunity for the institutions to come together to provide students with a truly representative national story. We all have deep collections that talk to civics in museums and art galleries, and teachers would then have the autonomy to directly link their classroom activities and the curriculum to what we have on offer with our collections. So the students would get to see a more representative story through an expanded access to collections, and there would be the support for the students to come here extended beyond the mandatory institutions.[79]

3.77Several witnesses identified vulnerable groups that would benefit from additional support. While acknowledging the financial support provided to schools participating in PACER, Mr Stefanic considered that more could be done to enhance PACER funding for schools traveling from remote and regional areas.[80]

3.78The Director-General of the NAA also commented on supporting schools to participate in the program:

The other thing to say around PACER is that, obviously, it provides funding to schools to encourage students to come to the institutions in the National Capital, but there are a large number of schools, particularly low socioeconomic index, low-advantage community schools, that aren't able to participate even with the PACER approved programs. If there were a review of the PACER program, it would be interesting to see whether there's a way of increasing the accessibility of the cultural institutions to those schools. One option, noting that the National Archives has offices in every state and territory, would be to look at what support and engagement we might be able to offer through those offices, as opposed to our head office in Canberra.[81]

3.79The ACT Government highlighted the Commonwealth Government’s recent piloting of an expansion of the PACER program. It observed that the expansion will make it easier for schools from outer regional, remote, and very remote areas, as well as otherwise disadvantaged schools to visit Canberra.[82]

3.80Beyond remote and rural community access to the Capital, the Canberra Region Tourism Leaders Forum highlighted limitations for students who identify as having a disability. Dr Marshall emphasised that there are school children that may identify as having a disability that do not have the opportunity to visit the Capital due to the difficulties associated with access. Dr Marshall advocated for every school child to have the opportunity to visit the Capital as it is where citizenship and democracy is explained.[83]

3.81Mr Watson acknowledged that the PACER program has recently introduced an initiative that focused on providing increased support for schools that have additional disadvantages. However, Mr Watson noted that funding guidelines change on a 12‑month basis which is not ideal for schools that plan at least two years prior to their visit. The Northern Territory was identified as an area where the planning, support, and funding needed to organise a trip to the National Capital would take time. It was recommended that the funding guidelines be in place for two to three years.[84]

3.82The PACER program was identified as a promotional and marketing opportunity for the National Capital more broadly. Young people participating in the PACER program could be provided with an information or family pack to take home that might encourage return visits to the National Capital as a family. Mr Jonathan Kobus, Executive Branch Manager, Visit Canberra, indicated this was a good suggestion to increase tourism in Canberra.[85]

3.83Mr Watson similarly suggested creating a welcome pack for new Australian citizens that invited them to Canberra to ‘experience the range of cultural institutions that support citizenship, or to watch students learning how to vote at the electoral education centre’. The objective would be to fully engage new citizens in the ‘nature and culture of our national enterprise’.[86]

Inquiry into Canberra’s National Institutions

3.84In 2019, the Committee tabled its report Telling Australia’s story – and why it’s important: Report on the Inquiry into Canberra’s National Institutions. The report made 20 recommendations, which are listed in Appendix D. The primary recommendation was that the National Institutions develop and articulate a shared narrative that directly connects them with Australia’s story and underpins their individual and collaborative work. Other recommendations included that:

• Canberra’s National Institutions make a stronger concerted effort to undertake collective branding and marketing, including the use of joint campaigns capitalising on major events and exhibitions occurring during the same season;
• a comprehensive review of the PACER program be undertaken;
• a program be developed to encourage and promote engagement in science education by school students visiting Canberra;
• a formal consultative structure for National Institutions be developed, to pursue the alignment of their strategic planning and policy, explore efficiencies and sharing resources where appropriate, and provide for joint advocacy, negotiation and collaborative marketing; and
• the need for the digitisation of analogue audio-visual items in the collections of the institutions be acknowledged, to ensure that all such material is digitally preserved by 2025.
  85. Similar themes have been raised and discussed in this inquiry. The Committee continues to support the recommendations.

Committee comment

3.86Experiencing the National Capital should not be restricted to physically visiting it. Thenational story told though the collections and exhibits of our institutions should be available to all Australians.

3.87Digital engagement through websites and online resources is an essential part of broadening the reach of Canberra’s National Institutions, particularly to regional, rural, and remote communities. The Committee is encouraged by the efforts of the National Institutions that have improved the digital engagement of its collections and records and considers online access to national holdings a priority. Providing access to Australia’s national and cultural institutions online not only connects Australians to their capital but promotes the National Capital to the world.

3.88Touring and outreach programs are an effective way to take the National Capital on the road. Visiting communities enables a broader audience to experience the physical collections and exhibits of the National Institutions. Similarly, borrowing programs provide local and regional centres the opportunity to showcase nationally significant works. The Committee supports innovation and investment in this space to allow more outreach programs in Australian towns and cities.

3.89Each of the National Institutions plays its own important role in telling the nation’s story. A consistent theme in evidence was the value of collective storytelling, and a shared promotion of the National Capital across the institutions. This collaboration can take a number of forms including through linked collections and exhibits, improved connectivity between institutions, joint marketing of ventures and events, and tailored experiences for visitors based on particular themes or issues.

3.90The Committee sees value in establishing a consolidated single platform for all National Institutions. This would communicate the shared contribution that the institutions make to promoting the National Capital and housing its history and culture. A single platform would provide a much easier way for visitors to access information about the Capital and what it offers. I single platform would also serve as a single point for all ticketing and bookings across all institutions.

3.91Similarly, the Committee supports the introduction of a Canberra pass or ticket that offers a practical way to explore the connectivity between institutions and offers a more holistic experience of the National Capital. Package, holiday and family deals, and guided tours could be offered through a collective Canberra pass or ticket.

3.92While the Committee does not recommend the appointment of a new Minister for cultural engagement and citizenship, considering this could be absorbed within existing portfolio responsibilities, the Committee acknowledges the role taken on by the NCA in coordinating collaboration between the National Institutions. The Committee recommends formalising this role. This recommendation is consistent with a formal consultative structure for the National Institutions proposed in the Committee’s 2019 report.

3.93The PACER program is a wonderful initiative that provides students with the opportunity to visit Canberra and experience the National Capital. A review of the program is required to ensure that the program includes a broad range of institutions, is accessible to schools with limited resourcing, is meeting its objectives, and is flexible enough to provide for the particular educational needs of schools. With its outreach across all Australian schools, PACER provides an opportunity to promote the National Capital to families and carers of visiting students. Similar opportunities to promote Canberra should be explored.

3.94The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth Government develop and fund a marketing campaign that promotes digital access to Australia’s national collections, particularly to regional, rural, and remote communities.

3.95The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth Government consider core funding to the National Institutions for touring exhibitions of regional, rural, and remote communities.

3.96The Committee recommends that the National Capital Authority work with the ACT Government to develop a single online platform that provides useful visitor information on all the National Capital and collecting institutions and points of interest. Information should include but not be limited to access and transport options, current events, and exhibitions, and ways to link and explore people, places, and themes across the institutions.

3.97The Committee recommends that the National Capital Authority develop a Canberra pass or ticket that provides entry to range of National Institutions, including ticketed exhibitions and shows, and provides certain discounts and offers for pass holders.

3.98The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth Government formalise the coordinating role of the National Capital Authority to oversee and coordinate the work and tourism opportunities of Canberra’s national and collecting institutions.

3.99The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth Government review the current PACER program to ensure that the program provides an opportunity for all Australian schools to participate, and to tailor a program to suit schools’ educational and travel needs.

3.100The Committee recommends that any Commonwealth Government review of the PACER program examine the potential for:

• a broader range of fields not currently covered by the program such as science, arts and culture;
• the inclusion of smaller institutions as part of the program;
• more flexibility for schools to visit institutions that support particular learning or education programs within schools; and
• remote participation options for schools that are unable to travel to Canberra.

3.101The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth Government develop a National Capital welcome and information pack to be provided to visitors and participants of national programs such as PACER and Australian citizenship ceremonies.

Footnotes

[1]Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, ‘Impact of our National Cultural Institutions’, accessed 2 October 2023.

[2]Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, ‘Impact of our National Cultural Institutions’, accessed 2 October 2023.

[3]Dr Marie-Louise Ayres, Director-General, The National Library of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 6.

[4]Dr Mathew Trinca, Director, National Museum of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 9.

[5]National Museum of Australia, Submission 25, p. 2.

[6]Museum of Australian Democracy, Supplementary Submission 36.1, p. 1.

[7]Dr Nick Mitzevich, Director, National Gallery of Australia, Response to Question on Notice, 29 August 2023, p. 1.

[8]Mr Patrick McIntyre, Chief Executive Officer, National Film and Sound Archive of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 3.

[9]Mr Patrick McIntyre, Chief Executive Officer, National Film and Sound Archive of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 4.

[10]Mr Simon Froude, Director-General, National Archives of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 22.

[11]Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, ‘Impact of our National Cultural Institutions’, accessed 2 October 2023.

[12]Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, ‘Impact of our National Cultural Institutions’, accessed 2 October 2023.

[13]Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, ‘Visions of Australia’, accessed 27 September 2023.

[14]Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, ‘National Collecting Institutions Touring and Outreach Program’, accessed 27 September 2023.

[15]Dr Nick Mitzevich, Director, National Gallery of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 10.

[16]Dr Nick Mitzevich, Director, National Gallery of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 12.

[17]Dr Nick Mitzevich, Director, National Gallery of Australia, Response to Question on Notice, 29 August 2023, p. 1.

[18]Ms Bree Pickering, Director, National Portrait Gallery of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, pp. 17–18.

[19]Dr Marie-Louise Ayres, Director-General, The National Library of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 7.

[20]Ms Stephanie Bull, Director, Museum of Australian Democracy, Committee Hansard, 22August 2023, p. 12.

[21]Ms Stephanie Bull, Director, Museum of Australian Democracy, Committee Hansard, 22August 2023, p. 13.

[22]Mr Matthew Anderson, Director, Australian War Memorial, Committee Hansard, 16August2023, p. 24.

[23]Questacon, Submission 32, p. 3.

[24]Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, ‘A New Cultural Policy’, accessed 29 September 2023.

[25]Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, ‘A New Cultural Policy’, accessed 29 September 2023.

[26]National Capital Authority, Submission 33, pp. 6–7.

[27]Mr Hamid Heydarian, Acting Chief Executive, The National Capital Authority, Committee Hansard, 12September 2023, p. 8.

[28]Mr Adam Robbins, Director, Visitor Experience, Marketing and Events, The National Capital Authority, Committee Hansard, 12 September 2023, p. 8.

[29]Ms Kareena Arthy, Deputy Director-General, Economic Development, ACT Government, Committee Hansard, 5 September 2023, p. 5.

[30]Ms Kareena Arthy, Deputy Director-General, Economic Development, ACT Government, Committee Hansard, 5 September 2023, p. 5.

[31]Mr Jonathan Kobus, Executive Branch Manager, Visit Canberra, Economic Development, ACT Government, Committee Hansard, 5 September 2023, pp. 5-6.

[32]Ms Stephanie Bull, Director, Museum of Australian Democracy, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p.12.

[33]Australian National Botanic Gardens, Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, Submission 16, p. 8.

[34]Australian National Botanic Gardens, Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, Submission 16, p. 8.

[35]National Museum of Australia, Submission 25, pp. 1–2.

[36]National Museum of Australia, Submission 25, p. 2.

[37]Questacon, Submission 32, p. 6.

[38]Mr Patrick McIntyre, Chief Executive Officer, National Film and Sound Archive of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 5.

[39]Ms Jo White, Director, Questacon, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 16; Mr Peter Byron, General Manager, Australian National Botanic Gardens, Director of National Parks, Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 35.

[40]Australian National Botanic Gardens, Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, Submission 16, p. 5.

[41]Questacon, Submission 32, p. 3.

[42]Questacon, Submission 32, p. 3.

[43]National Library of Australia, Response to Question on Notice, 16 August 2023, p. 2.

[44]Dr Tristan Hoffmeister, President, National Capital Attractions Association, Committee Hansard, 11September 2023, p. 2.

[45]Dr Tristan Hoffmeister, President, National Capital Attractions Association, Committee Hansard, 11September 2023, p. 2.

[46]Dr Mathew Trinca, Director, National Museum of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 7.

[47]Dr Tristan Hoffmeister, President, National Capital Attractions Association, Committee Hansard, 11September 2023, p. 2.

[48]National Capital Attractions Association, Submission 35, p. 4.

[49]Dr Mathew Trinca, Director, National Museum of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 7.

[50]Ms Jo White, Director, Questacon, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 17.

[51]Dr David Marshall, Chair, Canberra Region Tourism Leaders Forum, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 27

[52]Mr Peter Byron, General Manager, Australian National Botanic Gardens, Director of National Parks, Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 35.

[53]Mr Simon Froude, Director-General, National Archives of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 22.

[54]National Capital Attractions Association, Submission 35, p. 3.

[55]Dr Nick Mitzevich, Director, National Gallery of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p.11.

[56]Ms Bree Pickering, Director, National Portrait Gallery of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, pp.16–17.

[57]Mr Matthew Anderson, Director, Australian War Memorial, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 21.

[58]Mr Rob Stefanic, Secretary, Department of Parliamentary Services, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 3.

[59]Mr Jonathan Kobus, Executive Branch Manager, Visit Canberra, Economic Development, Australian Capital Territory Government, Committee Hansard, 5 September 2023, p. 6

[60]The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts consider on-site, off-site and online visits as school visits, public program visits as assisted visits such as guided or accessible tours and student program visits as restricted to students. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, ‘Impact of our National Cultural Institutions’, accessed 31 October 2023, https://www.arts.gov.au/what-we-do/museums-libraries-and-galleries/impact-our-national-cultural-institutions.

[61]National Capital Educational Tourism Project, Submission 38, p. 2.

[62]Parliament and Civics Education Rebate, ‘PACER Institutions’, accessed 4 October 2023.

[63]Mr Matthew Anderson, Director, Australian War Memorial, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 22.

[64]Ms Stephanie Bull, Director, Museum of Australian Democracy, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 4.

[65]Mr Simon Froude, Director-General, National Archives of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 21.

[66]Dr Marie-Louise Ayres, Director-General, National Library of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 8.

[67]Mr Patrick McIntyre, Chief Executive Officer, National Film and Sound Archive of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 4.

[68]Ms Jo White, Director, Questacon, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 16.

[69]Mr Peter Byron, General Manager, Australian National Botanic Gardens, Director of National Parks, Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 34.

[70]Parliamentary Education Office, Submission 46, p. 2.

[71]Dr Nick Mitzevich, Director, National Gallery of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 14.

[72]Dr Mathew Trinca, Director, National Museum of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 8.

[73]Dr Mathew Trinca, Director, National Museum of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 8.

[74]Ms Bree Pickering, Director, National Portrait Gallery of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, pp. 15–16.

[75]Mr Tristan Hoffmeister, Director, Access and Learning, National Portrait Gallery of Australia, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 16.

[76]Ms Jo White, Director, Questacon, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 19.

[77]Mr Simon Froude, Director-General, National Archives of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 21.

[78]Mr Garry Watson AM, Project Leader for the National Capital Educational Tourism Project, Committee Hansard, 11 September 2023, p. 4.

[79]Mr Tristan Hoffmeister, President, National Capital Attractions Association, Committee Hansard, 11September 2023, p. 4.

[80]Mr Rob Stefanic, Secretary, Department of Parliamentary Services, Committee Hansard, 16 August 2023, p. 4.

[81]Mr Simon Froude, Director-General, National Archives of Australia, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 22.

[82]ACT Government, Submission 37, p. 4.

[83]Dr David Marshall, Chair, Canberra Region Tourism Leaders Forum, Committee Hansard, 22 August 2023, p. 27.

[84]Mr Garry Watson AM, Project Leader for the National Capital Educational Tourism Project, Committee Hansard, 11 September 2023, p. 4.

[85]Mr Jonathan Kobus, Executive Branch Manager, Visit Canberra, Committee Hansard, 5 September 2023, p. 2.

[86]Mr Garry Watson, Project Leader, National Capital Educational Tourism Project, Committee Hansard, 11 September 2023, p. 3.