PESP 6 APPEALS

When Communication Breaks Down, Redress Must Still Be Possible

Today is the final day for appeals for the National Arts Council (NAC) Presidential Employment Stimulus Programme 6 (PESP 6) funding.

Beyond the deadline itself, this moment invites a deeper reflection on why appeal mechanisms exist and why they must be exercised responsibly — by both applicants and institutions.

At its core, an appeal is not an act of defiance. It is an act of engagement.

In everyday life, misunderstandings often escalate when assumptions replace dialogue. 

Messages are interpreted emotionally, intentions are questioned, and relationships fracture — not always because harm was intended, but because clarity was lost along the way. 

Public funding processes are no different.

Appeals Exist Because Human Error Exists

The NAC’s mandate recognises a simple truth:

public institutions are run by people, and people can make mistakes.

Miscommunication, administrative oversight, incorrect assumptions, or incomplete interpretations of information can and do occur — especially in large-scale programmes such as PESP 6. 

This is precisely why the NAC PESP 6 Appeal matters:

to correct, reconsider, and restore fairness where it may have been compromised.

Applicants who were declined for:

• Less resources

• Compliance-related reasons

• Low scores (including below 50%)

should understand that an appeal is not an accusation, but a request for reconsideration and clarity.

A Shift Worth Noting: Resources Set Aside for Appeals

Unlike previous funding cycles, it has been communicated that resources have been set aside for PESP 6 appeals. 

This is a meaningful development and aligns with the NAC’s commitment to:

• Fair access

• Equitable redress

• Transparent decision-making

While the appeal budget may be limited, the fact that it exists signals that appeals are not symbolic — they are substantive.

Applicants declined under “less resources” are therefore strongly encouraged to appeal, as additional funding capacity has been acknowledged within the appeal phase.

Compliance Declines: Questioning Is Not Disrespect

Some applicants were declined on compliance grounds they believe were unjust or inconsistent with the documents submitted. Raising such concerns through an appeal is not an attack on the institution — it is an exercise of a right within a democratic, accountable public system.

In line with the NAC’s vision of supporting and developing the arts through good governance, applicants are encouraged to:

• Clearly explain where they believe compliance was met

• Point out inconsistencies respectfully

• Provide clarity without hostility

Silence resolves nothing. Engagement creates record, learning, and improvement.

Appealing Is Participation, Not Complaint

For too long, the Cultural and Creative Industries have expressed frustration after processes have closed, often without testing the systems designed to address grievances.

Appeals are the appropriate, structured space for:

• Accountability

• Correction

• Learning

• Institutional growth

Complaining without appealing weakens future advocacy. Appealing strengthens the case for reform.

Final Call: Do Not Let Assumptions End Your Journey

Misunderstandings — whether personal or institutional — should not be the final word. 

The NAC’s appeal process exists so that clarity can replace assumption, and dialogue can replace frustration.

Today is the final opportunity to:

• Put your reasons on record

• Request reconsideration

• Participate fully in the process

Do not walk away assuming the system has failed you without first engaging it.

Appeal while the door is still open.

The Creative Passport is an independent platform focused on Arts, Culture and the Creative Industries. Readers are encouraged to follow, comment and engage constructively.

HOW TO FOLLOW THE CREATIVE PASSPORT

RECEIVE POSTS BY EMAILS