 Welcome back. We now move into the second session of the plenary, which is covering the strand on culture and economics. It gives me great pleasure to welcome as our first contributor this afternoon Jude Kelly, CBE, who is the artistic director of Southbank Centre in London. Jude founded the Solent People's Theatre and the Bantisee Arts Centre and was the founding director of the West Yorkshire Playhouse, as well as leading the cultural team for the successful 2012 London Olympic and Paralympic bid. Jude Kelly. Thank you. Well, thank you for the invitation to speak. Thank you for the invitation to share ideas with everybody here. Wonderful architecture, wonderful building. Thank you, Jonathan, for the imagination to start this in the first place. I'm going to talk about two things. I'm going to talk about the economic power of philosophy within cultural organisations, and I'm obviously going to use Southbank Centre as my example, and I hope you won't think that it's just a raging advert. And then I'm going to talk about the massive potential, which is still to be unlocked, that what I think would radically change the economic model of the creative industries. Somebody in a session this morning said, heritage appears often in response to trauma. And I think this is a very important ingredient because the things that make heritage and culture powerful and enduring is when, like making art, there is such a conviction, such a compulsion, there is no other way to do something than the way the artist will make it or history will force it to come into being. And that, although trauma is not something we'd wish on ourselves, this is often the case. You have to make a mark, you have to make a stand, you have to express something, even if it is grim and painful. I suppose it's phoenix from the ashes. Something good has to come from bad. And in the case of the Southbank Centre, which for those of you who haven't been there, is one of the largest arts institutions in the world on the banks of the Thames, 27 acres when it was originally conceived. It was the second world war that brought it into being. That period of the world, when so many people in the world had a moment when they realised that if you brought together the human ability for barbarity and the human ability for technology and you joined them together, something horrific would come to pass that nobody had conceived of before. And that is something that was not just about the Holocaust, it was about Stalin, about Hiroshima, Nagasaki, it was so many things. I think at that point humanity had to stop, pause and say, how do we create optimism again? How do we believe that humans could be in love with other humans? And many things evolved from that moment, and the Southbank Centre was one of them. In fact, the Edinburgh Festival was another. The Southbank Centre was created on the poorest side of the river in London, the side which had in a way the no-hopers, the wasterels, it was beyond the pale. And from that place came this huge commitment to this idea of the war artists called the propaganda of the imagination. Everybody's imagination should count. And the Festival of Britain was a celebration of the future, not a commiseration of the past, but it was there in order to make humans fall in love with humans again. It had fountains, it had greenery, it had all kinds of pop-up buildings, it had cafes, it had all night dancing, even though the rationing was still going, it had many, many things. A third of the population of Britain came to it, and a huge amount of it was free. So eight million people came to it in that period between when it was founded in May and when it came to an end rather suddenly in October. When I became the artistic director in Southbank Centre 10 years ago, the number of visitors who came past in a year in total was six million. Now we have 28 million in a year. I'm not somebody who's very keen on saying, and that's the proof of success, figures. But there's obviously a reason why they're coming, and 28 million people is actually quite a lot of people to manage. They come for lots of reasons, they come for the Thames, they come for the cafes, but they come really because they have a sense that they'll join other humans in a sort of fantastic river of excitement that includes an idea that they could realise themselves, not just a day out, but a sort of new window on the world, everything we believe in this room together about culture. And the reason I believe that we've gone from six million to 28 million is because we decided to return to the idea of this trauma and say what was it about this moment that was important, where you were compelled to say what your belief system was. And this is the key, I think, to the economics of culture. You have to have a belief system that goes beyond the fiscal and says this is what we want to tell you, this is what we want to share with you, this is what we want to commit to. And in our case, we return to the idea of the festival. The festival is a space of celebration, of inclusion, of spontaneity, of not controlling, of people making their own destiny to a certain extent. A festival, everybody understands that word. People don't find culture as a word easy, they find art quite difficult. Festival, everybody knows what that means. And so in creating these festivals that we have done, celebrations of nations like Brazil, celebrations of Africa in the Afro-Utopia Festival, Alchemy, China, and even festivals of death. Festivals that celebrate the potential of people while struggling with mental health. We do festivals all the time, that is our raison d'etre. But the reason I'm saying this is because it was born from a belief system that brought this cultural space into being in the first place. And I think the first thing we are as cultural players is we have to always make sure that what we're doing is not commerce, it's not pure tourism, it's not leisure. It's this thing that we talked about this morning, what connects humans in their souls. And that I believe as an economic model for culture has profound success. Because people already have shops, they already have cafes, they already have leisure experiences. But what they seek, what we all seek, is this way that we can connect up with the best part of ourselves. We want to believe that we're still imaginative, we want to believe we're still curious, we want to believe we're not dying, but in fact we're still living. And that's why the responsibility of culture and cultural destinations, artists, art makers and art placemakers, is to never renounce the idea that philosophy, meaning, purpose, devout faith in the potential of the human imagination. I believe this is the economic model that we build on. And I think we can demonstrate that when we do that, we actually have great economic results. And I think that people are surprised that the creative industries are so successful, because they'd always assumed the creative industries by having philosophy would somehow make it impossible to be economic drivers. But the opposite is true. Like love. If you have love, you have energy. Love doesn't make you all sappy and drippy unless it's all going wrong. It actually gives you great energy. So the first thing I want to say really is that I think we have to keep stressing unashamedly that the language of philosophy, the language of belief is the language of economic success. Of course it's combined with many other things. You know, you have to understand economic disciplines. But I hope we now are past the stage with some governments, but not all governments, where we have to suggest it's an either or model. Now, of all the festivals that we do at South Bank Centre, all the community participation, all the commitment to the universal, the many not the few, the right to the imagination, I suppose going right back to any rights of the human tompains the rights of man. The festival which when we started it seven years ago has outstripped all of them in economic terms is now in 17 different festivals in five different continents. The festival that's achieved the most economic success is wow, Women of the World. And this is my second point that I want to come to. I'm going to talk about for a while the economic potential of women in the creative industries. And at this point I just want to say something in general about me. Cos I've noticed that if you start saying I'm going to talk about women, people always then go, I wonder why she's going to talk about women. Obviously I am one, that's a clue. But I want to say that as a woman leading one of the most powerful institutions, if you look at the relationship between creative certainty and women, there is a massive, massive gap. And in that gap of creative certainty or creative legitimacy, the creative industries are losing a potential that could be a radical change maker. We talked this morning about cave paintings. I went to the oldest cave painting, I think they are, LG's caves in Somalia land recently and was shown these beautiful paintings. And I suppose provocatively, I have to admit it, I said to the chap who was showing this around, the women did this marvelously, didn't they? And he was really shocked and he said the women didn't do this. I said this was thousands of thousands of years ago, how do you know? He said women can't do this. I said well they can. He said women don't do this. Now what he was actually getting at was, in a sense women have not got the theological, philosophical right to make a mark that is an enduring statement for humanity. It's a very profound thing, his reaction. And from the idea that women didn't do the cave paintings, it must have been men, comes the whole idea that women as artists, women as creators, women as people who speak on behalf of the whole of humanity, is still not really legitimised. Some countries legitimise it more than others, many don't legitimise it at all and some are trying to pull it backwards. Now I'm a very happy person, I've got two wonderful children, I love all the men in my life, I've got plenty of men in my life in all different ways. And I'm not at all angry about my career, I've had a great time. But just speaking about 50% of the human race, still being in a situation where their creative confidence is so small, where their creative legitimacy is so small, not just as consumers but as makers, where their creative voice is so small, lots of exceptions to the rule, I don't need to tell me about Harry Potter etc, but in general we have this potential of girls and women who if they were persuaded by us, by the cultural community across the world, that a woman's voice could speak on behalf of humanity with the same degree of legitimacy, and not only that, but the woman's voice was needed. Not that it would be something that would be a nice extra, not done because it's a good symbol for diversity, not because we ought to do it, but it's half the human race. So if countries across the world are making as part of their next economic millennium goals the realisation of women's empowerment, my challenge to us in the cultural sector is what are we doing about that? I'm not just talking about quotas, it would be nice to have more women to film directors, or shouldn't we get more women into management? I'm talking about belief systems, whether or not the men and women in this room talk fervently, passionately and in a committed way about 50% of the world being realised creatively in the way that you talk about communities in general. Because when we talk about communities in general, self-realising, having a voice, finding their identity, realising their potential, being active, we tend to mean in the status quo in which they already exist. And while we think about we're going to move forward economically, we move forward economically in the same shape that they're in already. So I feel that we've done a great service to get the creative industries into the imagination and minds of governments, of powerful people, of institutions. But we are constantly, as women, apologising for raising this issue of 50% still to go, and men generally will go, well, I'm happy for it to happen, I'm happy for it to happen when women make it happen. But actually, this is something together. And I'm really asking for the imagination of a group like this to think of the economic power that will be released if women in the creative sector, as artists, were really given the confidence. It'll take generations, but it's taken generations to get to the stage where we believe that everyone has the right to read and write, where we believe everyone has the right to vote. It's taken generations. So that is really the thing I wanted to say. I can see the power of philosophy from coming to the Southbank Centre, re-engaging with its principles and where we are now. It's amazing. I now want to do something together that is not something we've seen yet, but something that we could imagine happening. And I think that if we did that, the economics of the entire sector would change forever. Thank you. Thank you very much, Jude. I'm now going to hear from the First Minister of Ministerial Delegations this afternoon. I'd like to call Deputy Minister Park Yongguk. He's the Deputy Minister for Culture, Sports and Tourism from Korea. Minister Park, thank you. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Minister and Distinguished Delegates. It's an honour for me to stand here for you and present for the 2016 Admiral International Culture Summit. My presentation will center on cultural enrichment and creative economy, which are two of the four tenants that guide South Korea's Government Administration. Cultural enrichment and creative economy are the key words of incumbent Korean Government. I will first focus on explaining how the Korean Government views cultural enrichment and creative economy, and its plans to combine both concepts to elevate South Korea's economy to new heights. Cultural enrichment, as defined by the South Korean Government, refers to the activities carried out to inspire all sectors of society to share the value of culture and thereby help cultures as the driving force behind the society's development, solidify the foundation for the nation's advancement and contribute to the well-being of individual citizens. The creative economy has been defined by many scholars. According to John Hawkins, it refers to the development of this concept. It refers to an economic system centered on fostering creativity in not just IT-related sectors, but across all industries from manufacturing to services and distribution, thereby boosting the whole economy. As demonstrated by these definitions, cultural enrichment and creative economy indicate that the value of culture can be disseminated across all industries and serve as the driving force to foster creativity within them. In June, the Korean Government successfully hosted the 7th Asia-Europe Culture Minister's Meeting attended by over 160 government representatives of ASEM, including over 20 culture ministers and vice ministers from the member states. The participants engaged in active discussions about culture and the creative economy. This clearly showed that South Korea is not alone in seeking ways to achieve a creative economy through cultural enrichment. The Korean Government recognizes that the combination of cultural enrichment and the creative economy will bloom into a innovative prime mover for the nation and is aggressively taking steps to achieve both commercial expansion of culture and the implantation of culture into industries. The commercial expansion of culture can be understood as culture nurtured into an industry in itself, such as the content industry and tourism industry and developed into a future growth engine. The commercial expansion of culture can be explained through the example of the culture creation convergence belt established in Korea. The brand name for the culture creation convergence belt is CEL, which has a double meaning. It stands for both cultural enrichment leader and creative economic leader. The cultural enrichment leader is intended to instill a sense of pride in all beneficiaries of the government's policy to support the culture industries and encourage them to march forward. The creative economic leader reflects the South Korean government's determination to achieve a creative economy through cultural enrichment. The culture creation convergence belt is the first system designed to maintain a virtuous circle of creativity for the culture industries. It helps innovative ideas bloom into new startups, assist them to grow into robust companies and stimulates them to reinvest in further innovative ideas. Now I will move on to the implantation of culture into industries. The implantation of culture into industries refers to all the activities carried out to reinforce the competitiveness of industries by enriching them with layers of culture unique to Korea. The leading example is Korea's cosmetics industry, which has succeeded in pushing its boundaries and pioneering the new sector of K-beauty by drawing on the global infatuation with the Korean wave. In 2015, the K-beauty sector's trade surplus exceeded the $1 billion mark. Most specifically, the implantation of culture into industries refers to all the efforts aimed at reinforcing their competitiveness and thereby ensuring sustained economic growth by enriching all business activities with cultural elements. Let me introduce some representative projects to illustrate this. One of the best examples of implanting culture into corporate management is the Corporation Artist Pairing project. This project pairs a corporation with a team of artists which stays on site to design programs and services that can cater to the corporation's needs and interests. The project aims to accelerate corporate innovation by grafting cultural creativity to all aspects of a corporation, including project planning and marketing. Another great example is the Corporate Patronist Expansion project. We provide incentives to those corporations certified as corporate sponsors of cultural activities and art and operate the cultural entertainment expense support system which recognize expenses spent on forms of cultural entertainment for partners and clients as business expenses. The Korean government also strives to make the most of the global popularity of the Korean wave and boost the nation's industries. Previously, the spread of the Korean wave was mainly driven by the proliferation of K-pop and K-dramas. Today, Korean cuisine, beauty products and fashion are also surging in popularity and reaching out to an ever-increasing audience. As such, we are providing support for promotions and business meetings related to well-known Korean wave-themed events such as K-con and Mnet Asian Music Award to help Korean companies to take advantage of them for marketing purposes. In addition, the Korea Sale Festival will be staged at the end of the year which is designed to provide visitors a wide range of entertainment options encompassing Korean wave-themed festivities, shopping and tourism. Based on the policies discussed above, the Korean government will strive to realize the desired outcomes from its focus on the commercialization of culture and the implantation of culture into industries and thereby bringing visible positive changes to the fundamentals of its economy. I hope my presentation helps you again a better understanding of the concepts of cultural enrichment and creative economy that are serving to guide the Korean Government's administration. Thank you for your listening. Thank you, Minister Park. For a different perspective on culture and economics, we are going to hear from Minister Nathie Mithethwa. Minister Mithethwa is the Minister of Arts and Culture in South Africa. Minister, if I can call you to the podium. To the presiding officers, organisers and partners of this August event, ministers here present, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen. Firstly, let me start my contribution on this occasion by showering with felicitations the people and the people of the Scottish people and the role they played in the anti-apartheid struggle and their contribution in ensuring that South Africa becomes a democracy. Thank you very much for that role. We also appreciate your continued support to further deepen that very democracy in our country and we hope you'll be able to ensure that you also think of other people elsewhere in the world who are on the path to discover themselves and their democracy. Today, ladies and gentlemen, I've been directed to speak on the topic culture and economics, but with the permission of the program director, I want to cover the creative industry or creative economy as a whole within the limited time I have. As we all know, the current financial crisis that originated in 2007 is the worst world has seen since the Great Depression that started in the late 1929 and continued well into the 1930s. Up until today, the world is still filling the pinch of the economic downturn from which many countries, especially in the developed world, have not yet fully recovered. Similarly, the developing world have not fully recovered, but over the few years have seen some slight recovery, especially in the continent, Africa. However, the real growth potential lies in the creative industry across the globe. This industry is the future because, amongst other attributes, it consists of young people who are innovators by their nature. Economists agree that the creative industries form a remarkably healthy branch of the global economy. When the crisis hit in 2007-2008, well-export of creative goods and services continued to grow. The growth of the industry in countries like Nigeria, Ghana, Egypt, Senegal, Cameroon to mention a few demonstrates the ability of the sector to contribute to social cohesion efforts. Under bricks in recognition of the potential of the industry, bricks countries have signed an agreement on culture, which states the following amongst others. Being aware of the importance of broadening and deepening the cooperation in the field of culture. Being convinced that cultural dialogue contributes to the progress of nations and better mutual understanding of cultures facilitating the approachment of peoples. A report by the International Confederation of Societies of authors and composers highlighted amongst other things, one, the creative and cultural industry generated an amount of $2,250 billion, creating more than 29.5 million jobs. The CCI employs 1% of the world's active population. Creative activities contribute significantly to youth employment and careers. In the industry are relatively open to people of all ages and backgrounds. In Europe industry sectors typically employed more people aged between 15 and 29 years than any other sector. Creative industries also tend to favour the participation of women when compared with more traditional industries. Statistics compiled by the UK government showed that women accounted for more than 50% of people employed in the music industry. In 2014 compared to 47% in the active population overall. Moreover, creation is driven by small businesses or individuals giving rise to agile and innovative employers. More than half, to be precise, 53% of Canadian gaming developers say they are independent operators. In the US, artists are 3.5 times more likely to be self-employed than US workers overall. World-class cultural infrastructure is a catalyst for urban development. Building a museum often offers opportunities to engage in large urban development projects and to develop a new city brand around cultural and creative precincts. Such flagship projects boost the city's attractiveness for tourists, talent and highly skilled workers. Bilbao in Spain, Basque Country, is now an icon of culture-led urban regeneration. The construction of Guggenheim Museum led to the creation of more than 1,000 full-time jobs and tourist visits have since multiplied eightfold. Equally important, the cultural and creative industry makes cities more liveable, providing the hubs and many of the activities around which citizens develop friendships, build a local identity and find fulfilment. Informal cultural and creative industry sales in emerging countries were estimated to a total amount of 33 billion US dollars in 2013 and provided 1.2 million jobs. Performing arts are the biggest employers in the informal economy, providing unofficial music and theatre performances, street performances, festivals and concerts that do not play others' rights, private performances at marriages and funerals, etc. Which are often free for audiences in Africa. These performances are sometimes funded by individual sponsors. Our point of departure is that since the democratic breakthrough in 1994 in South Africa, our government has moved from the point that the creative industry has a powerful role to play in nation-building. In fact, arts and culture is the most potent weapon in the hands of humanity. From this understanding, among other things, we have a programme called Mzanzi or Southern Golden Economy. This programme is focused on strategic investment in all sectors of the industry with the aim of building markets, developing audiences and supporting human capital development. The basket of interventions that comprise the Mzanzi Golden Economy programme range from the establishment of an art bank to catalyse growth in the contemporary visual art market to the creation of cultural observatory which will collect and disseminate information to a series of investment mechanisms in market development platforms locally and internationally. The investment by government and the firm policy stands recognising the economic contribution of the creative industry has been given added impetus by the recent mapping study conducted by the Department of Arts and Culture in South Africa. We conducted this in 2013. The study found that the creative economy made a significant contribution to that of the country representing 2.9% across domestic product and that it created more than 500,000 jobs. Further, given the importance of transforming the nature and profile of the South African economy and improving access for previously disadvantaged South Africans, over 50% of enterprises were black owned and significantly over 30% were owned by young people. From an economic perspective, arts and culture incredibly important for the developing nations. They are an untapped and constantly renewable resource that can initiate immense growth, unleash skills and creativity and compete globally as they are expressed in unique and innovative ways. For governments, there can be no question all over the world as to whether arts and culture should be supported. It is however always a question of how much support it will need to thrive. As we conclude the programme director, I want to touch on the important area, the value of cultural diplomacy. The value of culture and the arts cannot be underestimated as we struggle to maintain our individual and collective identities and build our respective nations. Often referred to as soft diplomacy, learning about each other's world view, belief systems and way of life is a critical part of creating a better world for all. Central to cultural diplomacy is a notion of the people-to-people relations with partner countries jointly engaging each other and deepening their understanding of each other. Today the world faces unprecedented challenges. High and continuous rising levels of youth unemployment and disenfranchisement is a taking time bomb for all of humanity. A deep economic recession, growing evidence of the impact of climate change and a wave of migration into and across Europe not seen since the world war or the second world war as people flee terribly conflict in their countries. Now more than ever, we must invest in and support the creative industry as a way for people to retain a sense of self, as a way to build prosperous and innovative nations and, most of all, as a means to be themselves, express their views, identities and feelings in constructive ways. Thank you for your attention. Thank you minister. Now, in a slight break from the programme, I'm going to call Michael Govan to come and speak to us from the podium. As Delgates may know, a new initiative in this summit, 35 young people aged 16 to 26 from across the UK and Europe have been invited to attend the summit to engage with policy makers and culture ministers. Michael Govan is a member of the Scottish Youth Parliament as well and wishes to address the plenary session and join us. Michael, thank you. The criss-cross winds lie beneath my sleeve. It's my silent shame, hidden from sight. The addiction I crave, it makes me feel alive as it takes me closer to heaven's light. I can't face them around the day, so I reach for the razors at night. The pain is my prayer, my blood, the sacrifice and after I almost feel alright. Tell me it's not right, I should stop. You'll hurt yourself, you cut so deeply, they worry I might die. They don't see that's the point. I want to feel my soul ignite, to end the feelings I can't fight. Those aren't my words, but the words of a 17-year-old girl called Courtney I once worked with in a youth work programme using arts as a way to give young people a chance to express themselves and express their feelings. She went from being a regular self-harmer in and out healthcare systems to now flourishing the Edinburgh University in an arts programme. It was that experience working in a six-month placement in arts therapy as applied in youth work that got me wondering what is the impact of the arts? How can we apply it not just in the cultural sector but across everything in our country? A lot of various academics have looked at this subject before me in the University of Minnesota. There was a lot of research done about the impact of arts therapy supporting those with disabilities, like autism or dyslexia. The University of South Carolina looked at investment in youth arts education and found that you get a 150 per cent return on what you spend, those savings coming from savings in criminal justice down the line as young people are less likely to offend, and increased tax revenue as young people realise their potential. In the post-2008 world, we have seen decreases and cuts across all sectors, and a lot of the funding for arts programmes has dried up. If you look to your left, you will see clearly that the passion hasn't, as young people still show up, desperate to have their voices heard and to make a difference in today's world. Between us all, we have a massive, untapped resource. We have a culture, our arts, industries. They can develop tourism, as you can see from the Edinburgh fringe. They can support healthcare, supplement education, encourage safer communities and increase income. I'm not saying that the arts can replace any one sector, but it can support every sector. In today's world, when young people are told that we can't afford to invest in the arts, I think that they are justified in turning the question back. How can you afford not to? Young people now more than ever need to see an investment across the world in all countries into their future. Culture and arts is more than just a way of expressing ourselves. It's our heritage, it's our souls, and that's why we need it in today's society. Economics is a part of it. I've said about how you've got a 150% return. That's just the statistics that we can find. What about looking at the individual stories? Courtney, the girl who wrote the poem I read earlier, how will she go on to benefit the society of all of Scotland? We simply cannot predict the economic impact. When we go back to wherever we've all come from and talk to parliaments or to civil servants, to our organisations, maybe we too should be asking the question, changing it. It's not how can we afford arts, it's how can we afford not to. Thank you. Thank you very much, Michael Gowan, for that perspective. Now we know what passion looks like. We're now just going to move to the end of this plunar session. I'm going to call Michael Power, if I may. Michael is a professor of accounting at the London School of Economics and has addressed previous summits about the value of culture in a world as the increasingly risk avert. Michael. Thank you, Presiding Officer, ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests. It's a great honour to be here two years after my original appearance at this summit and I'd like to thank Jonathan very much. I may be a walking example of cultural resilience because I was asked to speak for six minutes and you can see that there are 25 minutes to go today, so I'm putting myself to a test. I've been listening very, very carefully to all the brilliant presentations of this morning, including the one we've just had, which was excellent, and rewriting my talk as I went along. I think it'll be ready by about four o'clock tomorrow afternoon. However, I'm here now to talk to you. Let me give you the punchline, first of all. I've been an academic accountant for 30 years, the last 10 years. I've served on some rather big boards of financial companies with all the experiences that they've had, and I'm convinced of one thing, that accounting, that boring, boring practice accounting, leads thought, determines the way we think, determines the way we give attention to things, shapes the decisions we make, and is, as we heard from Jude, a belief system in its own right that we have to take account of. Now, that's all very well, but if we want to realise the dreams that have been expressed in so many of the interventions today in the plenary sessions and in the private committees and the dream is essentially this of establishing the foundational role of cultural activities for the wider economy and not the other way around. If we really want to do that, we have to change the way we account for culture, and we have to be rather brave in the way we do that. That's the punchline, and we'll come back to that point shortly. But I want to really begin the substance of my talk with a story. It was my great fortune to study philosophy at Cambridge in the early 1980s. My research supervisor, Gerd Bukdal, told me the story of how having escaped the Nazis and fled to England, he and his brother Hans were eventually deported by the British as enemy aliens in the 1940s. The deportation ship was horribly overcrowded. Conditions were unimaginably bad, and the deportees, very few of them, the intended Nazi sympathisers targeted by the British, were often physically beaten. Bukdal related to me, he was my PhD supervisor, and as I got to know him, he related this story to me how in these circumstances and with the continuous threat of being torpedoed, he and others had held philosophy classes on the deck of this boat, using C.Jode's Guide to Philosophy, published in the 1930s as a text. Somehow a copy of this book had made it on board the ship. The experience-shaped Bukdal, who, an engineer by training, eventually took the path to academic philosophy, ultimately to Cambridge, where he founded a brand-new department, the Department of History and Philosophy of Science. The ship in question was the Dunera, and this ship occupies a very special place in Australian history since many of its deported passengers, the so-called Dunera boys, not girls, but that's what they're called, the Dunera boys, went on to achieve such great things in Australian life, including major cultural contributions. It is one example, and we've heard several already, of how in the most extreme circumstances in the face of trauma, as you said, human beings turn to cultural activity, often in surprising ways and full of improvisation, and I think you used the word conviction, Jude, as well. Great conviction. In this case it was philosophy, but it could have been music, poetry, theatre, or anything else. That's not important, but they did this for many reasons, to survive and get through the day, to forget, to have a sense of community, to build an identity, to express themselves. But in having those regular philosophy classes on the decks of the Dunera in 1940, Bookdale and his colleagues created a tiny infrastructure, and we've heard the word infrastructure used several times today. For many examples of this kind, where there has been a turn to culture in extremist, amidst the rubble of societies, and as we've heard, this very festival has its roots, and many other festivals like it, in post trauma, post war reconstruction. So the thing is this, and I think we've touched on it already, what can we learn from these cases of cultural activity on the edge? Cultural activity in extremist? What might be the practical kinds of lessons for culture ministers in different countries facing your very, very different demands? Well, I think I've heard over the last three or four hours, and very eloquently in the last couple of minutes, that the cultural field is not an optional add-on after other basic needs have been met. So the challenge is how can one sustain that, make it real, and from my point of view, build it into the microstructure of your everyday work as ministers. Culture is obviously not a thing of the economy, but economies depend on the civic properties and the forms of communication, hope and energy that it generates. And I've just heard that loud and clear since I've been in Edinburgh. So what are the challenges? That is a noble aspiration, which we repeat again and again. But one of the challenges is that all of us are embroiled in the kind of micromanagement which distracts us from that fundamental insight. And that's where the accounting matters. Does the accounting that we have and aspire to support that fundamental insight, or is, as I'm going to suggest to you, a distraction from it with its own merits and properties, but nevertheless a kind of cultural accounting which is not actually aligned with culture as we understand it in those terms? That seems to me the kind of challenges for all of us here. And just Andrew so eloquently yesterday said that we need to build a new cultural politics, and if I heard correctly, somehow some new concept of budgeting, boring old budgeting needs to be articulated in that project. So my challenge to culture ministers and myself really is how can we scale up the messages of these powerful stories, like the story of the Donara, and how can that scale up and be taken from these extreme circumstances and remain powerful in orientating the way we make decisions now? What are the Donara stories in your societies that have that scalable property? And how confident are you that you pay enough attention to those stories and are not distracted by the accounting systems that are your legacy? Those systems which distract us from the connectivity of economy, culture, and so many other things. The philosophy classes on the decks of the Donara were also acts of bravery and defiance in the face of a rather cruel British crew. The bravery is also institutional as well as personal. It represents a determination to create a civic space, however small, against the odds. And the founding intuition of this bravery, evident in the founding of this festival, is that this civic space is co-extensive with and may even, as Jonathan indicated in the case of East Timor yesterday, may even precede the creation of functioning markets and even the building of physical infrastructure. There's not a hierarchical ordering in these things where culture somehow comes last. So what might that kind of cultural bravery mean today? Well, it does mean changing the policy conversation in order to allow for this foundational role of cultural activity and for the sense of the resilience that it gives and the identity formation of individuals that it gives to organisations, regions, and entire societies. And to articulate that aspiration not as something necessarily that we can prove with impact statements but is actually a bet on the future because most of the large-scale investments that organisations take, like building this parliament, for example, are bets. They are dressed up in economic language but they are bets that we have to take in order to realise certain dreams and aspirations as societies. But we make them look more rationalistic than they are with the accounting that we have. So to make that step, culture ministers will need a little bit of bravery of their own both to resist the micro-distactions of the performance culture but also to articulate this new budgetary language. We should, of course, measure where we can. I think event ticket sales and revenues measure financial performance for festivals. Children attendee metrics may also measure a kind of outreach to the young. Attendee questionnaires may measure spot satisfaction but community engagement metrics may proxy for longer-term impacts on social alienation and identity formation. We can continue to invest in smarter and smarter performance and impact metrics. We can expand our cost-benefit calculus around culture. But actually I suggest we need to step back from these things and imagine what kind of accounting we really want for the kind of thing that we think culture is. There seems to me to be a consensus in the room that culture in the aggregate is a kind of infrastructure, a kind of civic infrastructure. And I've already heard in previous sessions really interesting efforts at mapping that infrastructure and thinking of it visually and working on it in that way. But from an accounting point of view it's a kind of intriguing capital asset problem. How can we describe those capital assets? How can we sustain them? And how can we continue to invest in them? Now we're quite used to talking about infrastructure in many different settings these days, energy, water, roads, the built environment obviously. And the reasons for this are varied and complex but I think there's a new accent on resilience in many areas of society, particularly urban resilience. It's also the case that we neglect infrastructure at our peril. It seems more expensive to fix it in the long run but it's also very easy to ignore the necessary expenditure to sustain it in the short run. But it seems to me that the argument of this conference is that states, markets and communities, their sustainability is as much a stake and much a problem for civic infrastructure as it is for water supply. So this notion of infrastructure which has been aspirationally used many times in this conference already is very difficult but can we actually match our accounting to it? It's easy to fall back on the accounting illusion of disconnection, of things being separate from one another, museums being accounted for as if they were just organisations like any other. So we have to recover a form of accounting for connection. And I think we could probably learn quite a bit from, culture ministers could learn quite a bit from infrastructure projects and network projects themselves. There's also been some talk of new methods of financing. I didn't hear much about borrowing to invest in cultural infrastructure but lots of interesting innovations around partnerships and private public partnerships and sharing. But in each of these there needs to be a lead risk taker and I think the interesting dimension of cultural infrastructure is the sense in which it's risk taking and how we think about it. Another possible way to think about this infrastructure of cultural infrastructure is in terms of a stock of interconnected values. We tend, it's possible to think of three very abstract values that orientate our views on culture. One is community, one is economy and one might be a sort of state building sustainable project. But if the story of the Dunera means anything these three values are interconnected in infrastructure. They serve and fuel each other. They represent different kinds of capitals which can must be maintained and for which we need a new kind of budgetary process. So these are just very preliminary remarks but we have to find a new way of accounting for infrastructure which is commensurate with the aspirations we have. And if that makes sense to you at all then it suggests a kind of new constitution if you like that might govern investment in cultural activity. So I just want to suggest a few principles that might be appealing. First in essence culture is not to be conceived as an instrument of economy but as an infrastructural condition of the possibility for the optimism and emotional energy which animates economy. And for that reason I'm very ambivalent about economic impact statements and I think the preceding speaker kind of echoed that ambivalence as well. Secondly it follows that culture ministers and culture ministries need to develop different descriptions rich descriptions and tools to provide analytical accounts of infrastructure and its foundational role. Here I suggest the paradigm is not accounting but maybe network economics, ways of visualising connectivity, mapping processes and governance processes which support all of that. We don't know the way culture is connected to other sectors of the economy and society. We don't know all these connections but we have very very strong intuitions about them. The accounting system does not have to be perfect. It just needs to steer decision making in the right kind of direction. Third culture ministers should seek to understand these modes of cultural activity which thrive in extreme community conditions and asks how they can recognise and celebrate them. We'll hear about street opera tomorrow and we've already heard in other sessions about capacity investment in education. So how can that sort of micro sustainability which we see in the Dunera case become a real focus for policy makers? And fourth in policy environments where audit and performance cultures are very strong particularly in western developed economies culture ministers need to ask what values are actually at risk when I begin to think about cultural activity in this way in terms of short term easy to measure metrics because it's clear that the things that we value most are actually those which are hardest to measure and where we might actually decide not to introduce measures. And I see it as a kind of being a student of risk management, I see this in risk management terms as managing business continuity and focusing on or trying to focus on those critical assets which if they weren't there we would miss them terribly. And I think that's if you take an infrastructural perspective on culture the driving question is what would society look like if it wasn't there? And I think this is that shifting of the owners of proof which you offered us in the previous talk. So by beginning to frame the cultural conversation in terms of infrastructure and what it takes to account for infrastructure the conversation within cultural ministries and with treasuries and so on can begin to shift in some way. It would not just be about specific projects which can come and go and about which one has to make difficult decisions both about those projects and about how they might compete with other social welfare programmes and so on. Not just that conversation but it would be a conversation about the overall shape. What is the shape of the cultural infrastructure that we have? Is that the shape we want it to have and what should we do about it? And it would also be about being honest as policy makers about where one is dressed where one is actually taking a bet on the future where one is a risk taker and not dressing that up with the language of accounting which gives things much more certainty than they actually have. So just to conclude very quickly some questions for us to think about in the session that are coming. If any of this has made any sense at all then what do you think you can learn from non-cultural material infrastructure projects and your colleagues who work on those? What could be the lessons and transfers? Because so far I've heard a great deal of aspiration and use of infrastructure as a metaphor for capturing a sense of where we want to be but as a hard-nosed accountant I think that has to be turned into things that are actionable and have traction. So what can we learn from material infrastructure projects? How do you know? Do you know the shape of your cultural portfolio? How do you even think about the aggregate shape of that cultural portfolio and does your accounting system help you with that or does it get in the way of that? And how, finally, just returning to the case of the De Nure which I started with, the De Nure was just a regular philosophy class taking place in the most extraordinary circumstances on the deck of an overcrowded ship. But it was a piece of infrastructure building and the infrastructure that we value most is also the most invisible, the most invisible. So the challenge that I would throw out is do your accounting systems and do your everyday working practices increase or decrease the visibility of that infrastructural role for culture. And how can we have an accounting system that helps societies grow into the bets that they've taken just as we've grown into this building and other bets that have been taken even though they were slightly more expensive than we anticipated? Thank you, Professor Power. Again, my thanks to all our contributors this afternoon. I'm now going to hand over again to our summit team. We're going to break out into discussion groups and then we'll resume the preliminary tomorrow morning but I'll close this session.