HK Culture Chief Defends Venue Scheme Cuts, Dismisses Censorship Fears

Hong Kong’s culture minister, Rosanna Law, stated that a recent decision to reduce the number of government venue partners is intended to create “more opportunities” for local arts groups. The move comes amid ongoing concerns about censorship and artistic freedom.

Venue Partnership Scheme Changes

Law addressed the matter on a Commercial Radio programme on Tuesday, responding to questions about the Leisure and Cultural Services Department’s (LCSD) Venue Partnership Scheme. This scheme, established in 2009, prioritizes partner arts groups when booking government venues for activities, aiming to foster long-term collaboration.

Previously, at least 20 arts groups were selected as partners in each round of the scheme. However, the latest list, unveiled on Monday, includes only 16 local arts groups partnering with 11 LCSD venues for the sixth round, running from April 2026 to March 2029. This represents a decrease from the fifth round (April 2022 to March 2026), which included 22 partner arts groups across 12 LCSD venues.

Did You Know? The Venue Partnership Scheme has been in place since 2009, initially selecting at least 20 arts groups per round to collaborate with government venues.

Law explained that reducing the number of partners will allow more non-partner arts groups to access government facilities for performances. She noted that most venues in the latest round will have only one partner, preventing venues from being booked exclusively in advance.

The exception is the concert hall of the Hong Kong Cultural Centre, which will continue to be shared by the Hong Kong Philharmonic Orchestra and the Hong Kong Chinese Orchestra due to a lack of comparable performance spaces in Hong Kong.

The new list resulted in the removal of long-term partners, including the Hong Kong Ballet and Wind Mill Grass Theatre, both of which have been part of the scheme since its inception in 2009.

Expert Insight: Reducing the number of guaranteed venue partnerships introduces greater competition for access to government facilities. While presented as a move to broaden access, this shift could also create uncertainty for established arts groups and potentially impact their long-term planning and artistic output.

Law emphasized that the removal of partnership status does not preclude these groups from applying for venue bookings in the future, stating that all applications will be reviewed and that partners previously enjoyed priority in selecting preferred dates.

The move occurs following the enactment of the Beijing-imposed national security law, which has led to increased scrutiny of “soft resistance” – a term used by Hong Kong authorities to describe potential national security threats in areas like arts and media. Critics have expressed concern that this scrutiny could harm creative freedom and intensify censorship fears.

When asked if “soft resistance” was a consideration in the approval of the new venue partners, Law stated, “In Hong Kong, every trade must comply with the law. Every law. I think this has been very clear.”

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Venue Partnership Scheme?

The Venue Partnership Scheme, established in 2009 by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD), aims to facilitate long-term cooperation between arts groups and government venues by giving partners priority when booking facilities.

How many arts groups were selected in the latest round of the scheme?

Sixteen local arts groups were selected as partners for the sixth round of the scheme, which runs from April 2026 to March 2029. This is a decrease from the 22 groups selected in the previous round.

What is the government’s justification for reducing the number of venue partners?

According to Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism Rosanna Law, the reduction is intended to provide more opportunities for non-partner arts groups to book government facilities.

As the Hong Kong government adjusts its support for the arts, will these changes lead to a more open and diverse cultural landscape, or will they further restrict artistic expression?

Leave a Comment