Not so long ago, the buzz phrase in tertiary education circles was "centres of excellence".
Educational institutions with proven expertise in a particular field, and with prospects to advance and enhance the work on which their reputations had been made, would be preferentially treated in their application for funds when it came to the doling out of State largesse.
The acquisition of funding necessary for survival would be less circuitous and tiresome than that faced by those seeking to set up in opposition.
There is a tension between this general tendency and the recent announcement that the Dunedin School of Art at Otago Polytechnic is to disestablish five full-time positions because of cuts of about 10% to its Tertiary Education Commission funding - because the Dunedin School of Art undoubtedly has a history and tradition of excellence.
It was established in 1870 by David Hutton, a 26-year-old art teacher from Scotland - who arrived at Port Chalmers aboard the Christian McAusland in January of that year.
The first such school in the country, it was administered by the Otago Education Board, under the Otago Provincial Government, until the abolition of the latter in 1876.
It fell under the auspices of the central government's department of education and eventually was subsumed in 1921 by the King Edward Technical College.
In 1966, it became part of the new Otago Polytechnic.
That its passage to the present has been intermittently troubled speaks to the perennial problem for the arts and arts educators - one that finds expression in the curled contempt of the phrase: "What use are the arts, anyway?"
It is quite possible that such people do not have time or respect for the contributions to our culture and society made by such illuminati as Frances Hodgkins, Colin McCahon or Ralph Hotere (as a teacher trainee), but a great many people would beg to differ.
And these three, probably the most important and influential of all New Zealand artists, are distinguished alumni of the Dunedin School of Art.
Notwithstanding this illustrious history, faced with losing $3 million from its budget, the Otago Polytechnic has decided to take the scalpel to the School of Art or, as some opponents might have it, the bludgeon.
As a result, five jobs are to go, and remaining staff expected to teach across disciplines - in a remodelled three-year, rather than four-year, degree.
This may sound like a recipe for the dilution of excellence and a move from a specialised to a more generalised approach to the school's hitherto intense "hands-on" teaching/learning approach, but the public has been assured this is far from the case.
School of Art acting leader Prof Leone Schmidt told the Otago Daily Times there was no doubt running the school was expensive, but it had an international reputation, had been around for 140 years, and would "continue to flourish".
This comment came a day after polytechnic chief executive Phil Ker said: "Government funding is so tight that we can no longer afford to cross-subsidise programmes that do not pay their way."
It seems that excellence is fine as long as it does not have to be paid for.
This is a short-sighted position.
The polytechnic stands to denude itself, in the long-term, of the finest feather in its cap.
Otago stands to lose out in its reputation as a centre of creative excellence, whether it be in the visual arts, in music - classical and contemporary - in theatre, in documentary and short-filmmaking.
These are all fragile art forms which cohere to contribute to a rich and enriching cultural environment, which in turn feeds back into the community in visible and invisible ways, and thus - if their value must be so measured - into the local economy.
The present Government has just launched its review to improve arts philanthropy.
This week, Minister of Arts, Culture and Heritage Chris Finlayson said of the initiative: "The cultural philanthropy taskforce is interested in finding out how to increase charitable giving by private individuals to arts and cultural institutions over and above - not instead of - government funding."
Broadly, this is both understandable and desirable, but perhaps, with respect to the Dunedin School of Art, he might like to confer with his colleagues in charge of the Ministry of Education.
