Emma: Hello, everyone. Thank you so much to all of you for making it out today in the sweltering heat. We really appreciate it. You're all legends. I just want to say also, if you need to get up to wash your face or get a glass of water, have a snack or anything, please feel free to do so. It's very hot today, so it's important we stay cool and hydrated. Speaker 2: Yeah, there's cold water in the fridge and ice. Emma: In the ice box, yeah. I'm really glad we could pull this together in time for the wrap up of Mixed Business 4. It feels really fitting to be able to have a conversation on artist-run initiatives and good practice at this time and I think it'll allow for some really nice reflections on Pari's history, what goes into keeping Pari afloat, and why it's important to have spaces like Pari in the arts. But before we jump in, I do just want to firstly acknowledge the Burramattagal peoples as the traditional custodians of the sovereign lands for which we're all gathered on today. I pay respects to First Nations elders, ancestors, and communities who have cared for country since the beginning, and I extend this respect and solidarity to the elders of the lands from which you are all joining from, and any Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people joining us today. The NAVA team works across many lands, so I would also like to acknowledge the Dharug, Dharawal, Ngunnawal, Ngambri, Dja Dja Wurrung, Kabi Kabi, and Jinibara peoples as the traditional custodians, knowledge-holders, and the first artists and storytellers on the lands in which we live, learn, and work. Sovereignty was never ceded. This always was, and always will be Aboriginal land. So my name is Emma, I'm based on Dharug and Dharawal country, and I work at NAVA as the NSW Professional Development Coordinator. I'm joined today by two Pari Co-directors, Tian Zhang and Naomi Segal. Tian is also an independent curator, writer, facilitator, and collaborative artist whose practice is underscored by conversation, criticality, solidarity, and joy, and Naomi is an artist whose practice takes interest in vulnerable, interdependent, and collective forms of relation. They hold degrees in Art Theory and Asian Studies, and is trained in intentional peer support, and alternative methodology for relationships and trauma recovery. There's so many intersections and worlds colliding happening right now, because Tian is also the writer of the artist-run initiative section of NAVA's Code of Practice. Naomi also works at NAVA with me. I helped to organise Mixed Business 4. Tian and Naomi's work are also featured in Mixed Business 4. So it feels really magical that we're able to just be in this space and share this moment together. Speaking of the space we're in, which is Mixed Business 4 land, as I mentioned, I think being here really primes us to have conversations that celebrate the people who make up Pari's ecosystem. As the exhibition draws to a close, it offers space to reflect on what work is required to sustain the ecosystem. So in today's talk, we'll explore what goes into ensuring the stability and sustainability of artist-run initiatives or ARIs for short, how can ARIs navigate issues of equity and fair exchange, what keeps ARIs afloat in our current times, and how can ARIs work collectively to gather care where it's most needed. If we've got some spare time at the end, I've prepared a short workshop activity for us too, but we'll see how we go with time. Before we hear from Tian and Naomi, I'll just give a brief introduction to NAVA, and the Code of Practice, for anyone who isn't familiar with us. So NAVA is short for the National Association for the Visual Arts. We're a membership organisation that works to bring together the many voices of the contemporary arts sector to help improve the fundamental conditions of work and practice. We do this through advocacy, education, and the core of our work, which is the Code of Practice. So NAVA is actively involved in a number of areas of advocacy to improve the working environment for artists and arts workers. A key advocacy priority for us this year has been legislating an award for the sector. You may know this already, but the visual arts is one of the only working sectors that isn't covered by minimum pay standards or employment entitlements. So while we continue this work, NAVA's Code of Practice continues to lead and set the precedent for minimum pay standards for the sector, ensuring that artists are paid fairly for their labour, their intellectual property, and their art. So what exactly is the Code of Practice? Has anyone here heard of NAVA's Code or referred to it before? Naomi Segal: I've heard of it. Tian Zhang: I refer to it all the time. Emma: Love that. So the Code of Practice sets out ethical and self-reflective standards for the contemporary arts sector, and that includes visual arts, craft, and design. It was originally launched back in 2002, and it provides practical and ethical guidelines for the conduct of business between artists and galleries, agents, commissioners, organisations of residencies and workshops, competitions, awards, prizes, and so on. The principles outline in the Code continue to be voluntary, not mandatory, except in the cases of copyright, moral rights, taxation, and equal opportunity, which are all covered by legislation. So the sixth edition of NAVA's Code was launched in September last year, and this was a huge collaborative effort involving extensive partnerships, consultation, feedback sessions, and working groups over a period of three years, and with over 2000 artists, arts workers and organisations across the country, and then 30 writers with lived experience in their subject area were then commissioned to develop chapters based on the discussions and feedback. The Code has also been endorsed by the Australian government as part of the National Cultural Policy, which is exciting. And in this major revision of the Code, it's been significantly expanded and restructured to reflect current concerns within the sector. And it features many new chapters including artist-run initiatives, which is the one we'll be exploring today. And ideally, the Code of Practice is something that should be used or referred to proactively. So before you engage in a project, write up a contract or policy, et cetera. And this is just to prevent any potential disputes that could occur later down the track. It's also intended to curb the additional labour that many artists find themselves doing of constantly having to advocate for their worth. Instead, you can just click someone a link to a page or dot point on good practice to keep whoever you're working with informed. And just lastly, the Code is also a living document. It'll continue to evolve as the sector changes. There's also a feedback button on every page in the Code, so we can encourage you to use it if you have any feedback for us. And you can access the Code online just using the link Code visualarts.net.au. Yeah, I think let's go back to ARIs. So NAVA's Code defines ARIs as a group of people who are often artists and who come together over a common objective, whether it be an art form, location, or community for the purposes of running a gallery, facilitating studio spaces or publishing work. And they often emerge in response to perceived limitations, gaps or opportunities within the sector or existing organisational frameworks. So during the planning of Mixed Business 4, the Emma's and I spoke a lot about Pari being this landing pad for many within the community who didn't have anywhere to land and how we all came together for similar reasons of desiring more collectiveness and ways to feel seen in what's often an inaccessible and exclusionary sector for many. So I wanted to begin just by asking both of you how you came to land at Pari. And Tian, maybe as the co-founder of Pari, we can start with you. How did you come to land within Pari's inception? Tian Zhang: Yeah, thank you. And thank you for that amazing introduction to set the scene of where we're at. I guess I came to land with what ends up being Pari around, and I can't really remember, maybe like 2017, 2018. And I was speaking to a friend of mine, Sasanki Tennakoon, and actually she was the one that said to me at the time that there was no independent or artist run space in Western Sydney on Dharug country. And it was just a very just one remark that she'd made. And she said that a dream for her would be to create that. And I guess over some time I just couldn't let that go actually. And so, Sasanki and I connected with her friend Rebecca Gallo. And then we had had a few meetings, and then we talked to Sophia from Parramatta Artist Studios, which is based in Parramatta. We were thinking about Western Sydney. We thought that Parramatta would be a really great place to have an artist-run space because there was a lot of opportunity and we felt that good transport, all of these things which are really important. And apparently the day before or that week, some other people had also talked to Sophia about the same thing. And so we all got together, me, Sanki, Bec, Justine Youssef and Kalanjay Dhir, and we started meeting. And Alex Tanazefti joined pretty soon after that because we needed some design support. And we met for probably about 18 months before we finally were able to secure the seed funding and sign the lease, I guess negotiate and sign the lease that ended up being this space that we're in now. Emma: Wow. Yeah, that's so interesting to hear Pari's origin story. And you're right, there's such a gap that needed to be filled. So yeah, it's nice to hear that. Naomi, how did you come to land at Pari? Naomi Segal: I joined Pari a bit later, maybe around the end of 2021. And I think I always had an interest in the possibility of doing things differently and spaces that provide the conditions to do things differently or more equitably or more playfully. And then I was involved with Pari through applying for the call out and doing some graphic recording and being in one of the exhibitions. But then I think the way I actually became a co-director, I applied to participate in P2P Ngariung, which was a collaborative series of workshops being led by Pari and Gudskul, our collaborator based in Jakarta, Indonesia. And I didn't end up getting into that program, but the application was read and valued by everyone and I think that was actually what ended up... Yeah, that's how I ended up joining through that application. Emma: Wow. So serendipitous. Yeah, thank you both for sharing that. It's really great to be able to preface this conversation with your individual journeys to Pari. And similarly, in the spirit of prefacing, I want to frame our conversation firstly by bringing our minds to the very concept of good practice. So NAVA's Code of Practice has undergone many updates and iterations over the years, and in this most recent edition, we've actually adjusted the language of best practice to good practice. And this is to acknowledge that striving for things like equity, access, inclusion, and justice in the arts is always an ongoing process and commitment. There's no best way of achieving these ideals because then that would leave no room for evolution, improvement, and adapting to new practices. So that being said, I'm curious to know what both of your relationships are to the concept of good practice. Naomi Segal: Well, the way I connect with this idea is maybe through my background in more mental health related things and former recovery related things. And I guess there's often the verbiage of things like a safe space. I feel like for me, there's really no such thing as a perfectly safe space because if I told an organiser what my requirements are for the space to be safe, they'd be like, "Oh, we can't do that." And so for me, it's all about the journey for making things safer and always the unfinished project and the continuous project of making things safer and better rather than making actually a false claim that this is a safe space, that this is the best way to do something because everyone's needs are so different. Emma: Yeah, I was just going to say that too. It's impossible really to meet everyone's needs, but I guess it's more important to just try your best to cover as many needs as possible. But yeah. Tian, did you want to add? Tian Zhang: Yeah, I agree. And I think also with the change of language leaves room for that, there are many ways in which to do things, and in this striving, there's many possible roots and what works in one space under certain conditions may or may not work in a different space, or there may be other ways in which to experiment and continue this, I guess striving for better conditions for everyone. Emma: I feel like that's what the Code is all about. And I also think about First Nations protocols when it comes to this stuff too, because the Code states that it's not a replacement for your own engagement with community. It's important to actually go out and see what the specific needs are. Just a thought I had. So Tian, you're also the writer of the artist-run initiative section of the Code. So I'm curious to know your approach towards writing this chapter. The chapter touches on many good practice principles such as outlining processes for fair and inclusive governance, as well as mitigating the effects of volunteer labour, the effects that it can have on sustainability and equity. Were there any particular experiences, conversations or practices that informed your perspective when writing this chapter? Tian Zhang: I mean, so many. Definitely my experience at Pari and starting Pari and creating a framework that we're working within now, but also experience in other artist-run spaces and collectives that I've had over some time. But also, NAVA engaged in a really great consultation process so there were a lot of notes that I referred to as well, which I guess highlighted... Often, what they were doing was highlighting the issues or the points of contention or struggle. And then I guess the added layer to that was then thinking through what would be the ideal or an ideal or some ideal frameworks or actions that could be implemented, which again is not to say that we're there yet, but to really think beyond, I guess beyond this space of these things aren't working, but then how can we improve it? And I think that was the real challenge was to try and to generalise it in a way so that it wasn't just about Pari or just about Sydney or Western Sydney or even any particular space, but to think beyond that. And obviously, there are many things that came up again and again I think, and they were the ones that I really focused on. Emma: I guess I'm also curious, do you have any new insights that maybe aren't covered in this chapter? Tian Zhang: Always. When you work relationally as well, there's always new things that you learn particularly about working with other people, about managing conflict within groups, especially without, I guess sometimes set roles and hierarchy, which is what we're dealing with when we talk about artists self-organisation, is there's often not a lot of set frameworks. And so you make your own and then thinking through how to do that equitably and fairly where everyone feels good about it, always learning in those cases. Emma: Yeah. And we'll definitely touch on that topic later on. So yeah, the chapter includes very solid advice and wisdom on running and sustaining ARIs. So I want to touch on some of the principles, what some of these principles look like in practice. So the chapter flags volunteer labour as an ethical issue that ARIs must keep in mind because burnout is a real issue in the arts, and volunteerism can create equity issues because not everyone can afford to donate their time and labour. So I would love to learn more from both of you as Co-directors about managing your capacity as volunteers while also wanting to dream big with the things that Pari wants to achieve. So for example, are there prior conversations that need to be had around boundaries and parameters? Do you have processes, practices, or even policies that are in place to help manage burnout and expectations? Maybe we'll start with Naomi. Naomi Segal: I suppose we have the literal relationship agreement. I think the key things it says in there about workload and burnout is how each person is responsible for being aware of their own capacity and what they can take on. I think there's also an expectation of maybe flexibilities, how it's phrased in terms of people stepping in to help with something, or there are times where someone will have to step out and it's quite fluid in that way with no fixed roles unless someone wants a fixed role. But yeah, I don't know if you have different thoughts. Tian Zhang: So the mutual relationship agreement was something that we, I guess co-wrote maybe a year ago now or a bit more than a year ago, which for the first time we had put into writing some of the things that we were already practising. I think often with workflow, something that we'd started to implement and talking about is I guess the shame or the guilt that can come with realising that you've taken on too much or on the flip side, wanting to do more but then in reality not being able to. And so yeah, I think trying to, I guess reduce that or try to provide a space in which it's okay to say that you are going to do something and then don't, and it's okay to just take a step back. We don't have to have equal share in the labour that we put in because that's just not realistic, especially when we're working in a volunteer capacity or mostly volunteer capacity. And I will note that we did start to pay Pari Co-directors for some roles and project work. So we're not entirely volunteer, but I mean by and large we are. Emma: Yeah. That's the goal to eventually get everyone paid. But yeah, I really feel that just as an artist myself as well, when I say I'm going to do these things and then actually I've reached my limit and then feeling that shame of like, oh, I feel like I have to commit. But yeah, it's really good that you guys have that conversation beforehand just so yeah, you kind of cover those bases. And I guess related to the issue of volunteerism and burnout is then the challenge of sustainability. So in addition to often running on a lack of resources and capacity sometimes, ARIs face a number of challenges in securing appropriate and sustainable income. And the Code talks about the importance of ARIs being able to evaluate their capacities to generate and maintain income streams. It also talks about the value of being able to leverage some stable income streams, which can then make room for ARIs to take risks and experiment with other income sources. So I'm curious to know about this process of securing income streams and I guess juggling the need for financial stability while also having that space to experiment and take risks. What does that look like? Tian Zhang: I think from the outset, and not all groups, collectives or artist-run spaces go down this track. But from the outset, we needed to secure funding because we wanted to pay artists and that was a really big priority that we had when we were starting. And so by necessity, we had to go down the funding route, which has led us to this point where we are moderately secure in that we have multi-year funding from the state governments, which then allows us to, I guess, know that we can pay our bills, the rent of this space, we can pay artists for a certain period of time. It does come with a lot of paperwork, which is the flip side of these things that can then draw on particular directors' labour and time to manage these things where we may otherwise be able to be a bit more free in what we do and how we spend our time. But I guess for us, at least for me, that balance is good because it provides at least some security in an otherwise very precarious environment. Emma: Totally. I think it's great that Pari is able to pay their artists, but I know that's hard for some ARIs. But yeah, I think that's something that Pari should be really proud of itself for doing. And I guess related to that, what's Pari's experience been like with navigating systems of funding where there seems to be a lot of trying to make what ARIs do fit within existing funding parameters? Has that been a challenge for Pari or what's that experience been like? Tian Zhang: Yeah, I think we are lucky in that when we got onto multi-year funding with Create NSW. We had a meeting with our grant officer who said, because we were a bit worried because you see these artist-run spaces get this financial security, and then they go down this route where they, I guess essentially then end up as mini institutions. So yeah, I guess we were a bit worried and we were very new. But we had this meeting with this grants officer who just straight up said to us, "Do not change what you're doing. This is what we love. We're not expecting you to conform to certain things which is the reason that you were brought on to this funding scheme is because we really love what you're doing." And so that was actually really great to hear very early on. That grant officer has moved on. We've had other contacts. But I think just knowing that from the outset really helped us to just be really secure in knowing that what we were doing already was good enough and that we weren't expected to change. But that's with a particular funder. With other funders, we do have other challenges. Yeah, it is something that we're constantly managing is this balance. But I guess we're still here and we're doing all right. Emma: Yeah, I think I was speaking with Brenton a few weeks ago and he said ARIs tend to have a short lifespan, but Pari's, it's been like four years now that you guys are still running. So it's just a testament too. Naomi Segal: I hate it when people say ARIs have a short lifespan because it really naturalises that the brevity of it, when really it shouldn't be. Institutions last for hundreds of years because they have resources and ARIs don't because they have fewer resources. Emma: Exactly. Naomi Segal: But yeah, touching on what Tian said, I remember when I was coming on as a Co-director, I conceptually had this understanding of having to be palatable to institutions and being beholden to funding bodies and things like that. And then Tian told me that anecdote about how actually they love us and we can just be normal. We can just be our authentic selves. So that was really affirming and a surprise to me back then as well. Emma: Yeah, that's a surprise hearing that as well. But yeah, I'm glad that you had that experience. So Tian you touched on this earlier, but I guess one of the things that sets many ARIs apart from mainstream art institutions is that they do operate in an often less hierarchical or even non-hierarchical sometimes structure. And this helps to create a form of collective governance that helps alleviate the power balances that you often find in other institutional settings. And this is not to say that burnout or harm still can't occur in these spaces. And Tian, I want to touch on your manifesto here. So Tian has a manifesto for how to be a human in the arts or a manifesto for radical self-care- Tian Zhang: Radical care. Emma: Radical care. Yeah, because so much in there that echoes the principles in the Code. And the manifesto acknowledges the need not to over-glamorise these collective spaces. But in the same breath, you do mention that it's been your experience that settings that do have more communal practices in place are more conducive to seeing the multi-directional and interdependent forms of care that are often absent in other institutional spaces. So I wonder if both of you could offer any insights or examples of what this multi-directional and interdependent form of care looks like in practice. And I guess my second question would be, how can ARIs help model an ecosystem of care that prioritises human relationships over the product, project or profits? Naomi Segal: Did you want to? Tian Zhang: No, you go. Emma: It's a big question. Naomi Segal: This is multi-directional. Yes, I have a thought but I might be cerebral and incoherent while I reach my point. Just bear with me. But I feel like for me, often I see people form collectives and they're collective in name, but in practice, the way they run isn't collective in the sense that I feel like I'm not sure if they really respect or value each other. And yeah, I feel like for me, ideally for a collective to be manifested as a practice, there has to be that mutual respect and mutual love and care of wanting to value everyone's voices and meet all of our needs. And I see consensus-based decision-making is a really important process of that. So as an alternative to majority rules-based decision making where it's like people vote and whoever has the most hands up, their decision goes ahead. With consensus-based decision making, we discuss and discuss until we arrive at a version of the proposal that we're all okay to move ahead with. And it might not be something that we're really in love with, but it's the decision that all of us can live with at the end of the day. And for me, that's an important practice. And I don't know if that answered your question. Emma: No, I think that did. I think consensus decision making is an interesting, I guess, method because a lot of places I feel like just do this little vote and it's like one and done. But it's great with that one, you can continue to have conversations. Naomi Segal: For sure. And I think for me, I picture it very abstractly and spatially in the sense that a consensus based decision is how far we can move to stretch and meet people's needs, but also at the limit of people's boundaries. And with every combination of different people, different things are possible through consensus. And so sometimes when we're making the shows here or making decisions about other things, it might not have been the decision I personally would've gone with, but I'm still just in wonder and amazement because I'm like, wow, this is what consensus achieved with this specific group of people with these experiences and these values. And that's the bit that I really love. Emma: Yeah, that's beautiful. Yeah, I think that is a key too because like you said earlier, a lot of collectives the image seems nice, but yeah, it's so important to reflect that internally. And I think consensus decision making is a great way to ensure that the core is stable. Yeah. Tian, did you have any insights? Tian Zhang: Yeah, I think the consensus model is really great. And maybe just to add to that, it's actually not about us all agreeing, which I think is a misunderstanding, often of consensus. We're not all agreeing, actually. We're arguing all the time, but respectfully. But it is because we all want things to improve for all of us, but also our community that we're inching forward in particular directions. And it's through the discussion that we find not only the best outcome from within the group and for us, but I've noticed that that also generally means the same, the best or not the best, a good outcome for our community as well, because our group is so diverse in our understandings and perspectives and our lived experiences. And so you amplify that. What we're also talking about is how to make or how to do things in a way that will suit our community as well. And I think something else that I wanted to bring up is, I think something that Naomi was really involved in developing is, I guess ways in which to bring people's wellbeing into these working spaces, because we don't just leave all of that behind when we come together, actually, it's encouraged and I guess finding ways to support each other through the running and running of this space and its programs is also about finding, just generally supporting each other as people. And I think that's what's really allowed us to, I guess, just be stronger together as well. And it was around that time that we were discussing all of these things within Pari about how to support people's wellbeing was when I was in the midst of writing the manifesto and also later writing the Code of Practice. So it all fed into it and it helped to, I guess create a greater sense of how we can adopt these practices in lots of different places. Naomi Segal: Yeah. Thanks for bringing that up because it reminds me that, I guess to institute consensus based decision making, it can't just happen because in order for people to voice their needs, voice what's important to them, what they value, what they want, there needs to be a certain threshold of trust and safety. And so it's like, okay, how can we make that so that people can advocate for what they want? And how can there be certain procedures or systems so that if someone needs support to advocate for a decision that they believe in, can someone else speak on their behalf or can someone else help them present that particular issue? And I think, yeah, that's also been super informed by my work at NAVA as well, because we're often advocating alongside artists and it's like, oh, wait, I can do that for myself as well. Emma: Yeah. My gosh, there's so much in there. But yeah, I think it's great that because we're not often taught how to voice our needs. So it's great to have a support system in place for that. And also, I think it's great that you guys are coming from a place where you are acknowledging each other's differences rather than just like, oh, we're here because similar. I think it's a differences that also is important. And of course, from being different conflict is going to happen. That's just inevitable. So yeah, I think it's great that you guys carve out this space where you can really be open to vulnerability and forming personal connections rather than just a working relationship. I think it makes it that much more special and genuine and yeah, just beautiful. Okay. So on a final question, I want to end on a note of just appreciation for ARI's and the space that they hold in the broader arts ecology. I think you really can't find it anywhere else. And the Code outlines the importance of there being fair exchange and benefit sharing where ARIs maybe don't have the financial capacity to remunerate labour. I think it says that it's important that non-monetary options be considered. So for example, offering up, learning new skills, access to the space and equipment and developing new relationships, et cetera. So I just want to explore for both of you, what non-monetary offerings have kept you anchored to Pari and continue to keep you anchored to Pari and its art community? Naomi Segal: Did you want to go first? Tian Zhang: Sure. I think it's funny because Naomi and I have joked before that being at Pari has ruined us for working at other places. Naomi Segal: It's made our standards too high. Emma: I love that though. Tian Zhang: And so for me, what keeps me here is this opportunity to work with people I love and respect and in a way that I guess best supports my values. And I've not really been able to do that anywhere else, even though I do for financial reasons, need to pursue other work opportunities. But yeah, I think what we're doing at Pari and how we're working together is, I just actually can't find that anywhere else, unless I joined another collective but one is enough. So that's what keeps me here. And I think the beauty of self-organisation is that there's no telling us what to do. We're generating that ourselves based on who's in the room and all of our needs and all of our experiences. And that negotiation, that working together, that collaboration is what keeps me here. Emma: Yeah, it sounds really rewarding. Naomi Segal: Yeah, I think I echo a lot of that in terms of working in a place where I can actually manifest my values. That's really important to me. And working where there is mutual respect, that's just the best. It should be the minimum standard, but it's so rare. I think for me as well, my context for coming into Pari, I was also just a very psychologically damaged person and very relationally damaged person. And so, collective practice for me became a container for relational healing in the sense that I was like, oh, I can say what I want and people are listening, or I can say the boundary and people are listening and oh, my boundaries aren't being pushed and manipulated right now. And so it was really important to experience that. And I think it raised my standards so much because now if I experience anything that is a bit off colour, someone yelling at me or being rude to me, I'm like, I actually don't have to tolerate this because I know what it's like to be respected and treasured and loved every single day by my collective and the wider Pari community. Emma: Oh my gosh, that's really beautiful. Yeah. It's so nice that you've learned how to feel safe through just being with the Pari collective. Yeah. I think that ends the questions, but I wondered if any of you had any questions for Tian and Naomi? Can have a little Q and A time. Yes Gary. Gary: I have a question. I was just wondering what in your opinion, in terms of the arts is missing in Paramatta? Tian Zhang: Is missing in Paramatta? Gary: Yeah. Tian Zhang: Generally, I think it'd be really great to have more artist-run spaces. We don't need to be the only one. But I also think that Parramatta in particular could do with, I guess a contemporary art space or an art centre that can provide some of that heavy lifting and other resources. Gary: Do you have an example of what contemporary art sense of what size? Tian Zhang: Not any particular size, but just there's Blacktown Art Centre, Casula Campbelltown. What could be an equivalent here? Because that's certainly not us. We don't have that type of resourcing, and I think that would be nice as part of a greater ecology. Do you have anything? Naomi Segal: No, I have no thoughts. Emma: Did anyone else have any questions? Speaker 2: I guess there will be Powerhouse opening in 2025 in Parramatta [inaudible 00:45:33] arts in the community. How do you see the Pari [inaudible 00:45:39]? Tian Zhang: Yeah. The Powerhouse is mega. So when I'm saying Blacktown, they're nowhere near the level of the Powerhouse and that, I guess we'll just have to see because yeah, I don't know what that means for the ecology to have also such a big player and then us. Yeah, I guess I'm not sure. Naomi Segal: We are vulnerable to every encounter. We're open to unknowing and surprise. That's my answer. Emma: Totally. But I also think that Pari, what it offers is so unique. So I think even if with the Powerhouse coming, yeah, I don't think it would take away from that. Tian Zhang: Yeah, not at all. I just think that there just needs to be more actually, which is great we're having this conversation. Maybe some of you will think about starting something somewhere else or nearby because yeah, I think there's lots of ways to do it and there's clearly a desire and a need even with us being here. Emma: Totally. Yeah, if anyone is thinking of starting one, the Code of Practice is a great place to start. But yeah, any other questions? Speaker 3: There's just too many and I can't pull any of them up because they're all there. Naomi Segal: All good. We'll be around later if you wanted to chat. Emma: Yeah. It's also very hot, so I'm sure everyone's brains fried at the moment. Naomi Segal: Yeah, we're going to have some iced coffee, iced tea, ice blocks. Speaker 3: Just ice. Naomi Segal: Huh? Oh yeah, just ice. Emma: Well, I think I was going to do a workshop activity, but it might be too hot. So I think we can just maybe end it here. But yeah, we'll hang around if anyone has any questions. I might also just quickly plug NAVA's Membership. If anyone is interested, we have different Membership tiers. So NAVA Premium Plus if you guys need insurance, we offer it at a discounted price. We have NAVA Premium, which gives you benefits like access to our resources. And if you just want to support our advocacy work and NAVA organisation, which is same benefits as NAVA Premium, but you get three staff logins. And yeah, if you want to contact us as well, you can reach us on email nava@visualarts.net.au. And you can also give us a call during our call window times, which is 09:00 to 10:00 AM and 02:00 to 4:00 PM Australian Daylight Saving Time, Monday to Thursday. And you can find those details on our website. Yeah, I think that's everything. Speaker 3: I can confirm having access to those resources are the best fact sheets, all the fact sheets. Emma: All the fact sheets. Thank you. All right. Amazing. Well, thank you Naomi and Tian for chatting with us.