Question: What year did the government create the "National Cultural Policy"
About the article "Malaysia", section "Culture".

Candidate passages:
Cultural diplomacy presents a number of unique challenges to any government attempting to carry out cultural diplomacy programs.
Most ideas that a foreign population observes are not in the government's control.
The government does not, and should not, produce the books, music, films, TV programs, consumer products, etc.
that reaches an audience.
The most the government can do is try to work to create opening so the message can get through to mass audiences abroad.
To be cultural relevant in the age of globalization, a government must exercise control over the flows of information and communication technologies, including trade.
This is also difficult for governments that operate in a free market society where the government does not control the bulk of information flows.
What the government can do is work to protect cultural exports where they flourish, by utilizing trade agreements or gaining access for foreign telecommunication networks.
It is also possible that foreign government officials may oppose or resist certain cultural exports while the people cheer them on.
This can make support for official policies difficult to obtain.
Cultural activities may be both a blessing and a curse to a nation.
This may be the case if certain elements of a culture are offensive to the foreign audience.
Certain cultural activities can also undermine national policy objectives.
An example of this was the very public American dissent to the Iraq War while official government policy still supported it.
Simultaneously the prevalence of the protest may have attracted some foreigners to the openness of America.
The success of cultural diplomacy is also extremely difficult to measure. 
The display of the national emblem was for some years regarded as unconstitutional in West Germany and West Berlin and was prevented by the police.
Only in 1969 did the West German government of Willy Brandt reverse this policy in what was known as Ostpolitik. 
The ministry structure included:  Minister's Office  Deputy Minister's Office * Communications Branch * Regional and Corporate Services Division (shared with the Ministries of Tourism and Citizenship and Immigration *Ontario Seniors' Secretariat * Culture Policy, Programs and Services Division ** Assistant Deputy Minister's Office ** Culture Policy Branch *** Culture Policy Unit - led the development of cultural policy, sector or industry specific strategies, legislation and regulations for Ontario's arts, heritage, libraries and cultural industries.
*** Strategic Policy and Planning Unit - led the development of strategic policy and multi-year plans, assessed research on best practices across jurisdictions and coordinated policy development with other ministries and levels of government.
** Culture Program and Services Branch *** Culture Liaison Unit - managed the ministry's relationship with its agencies and built stronger linkages with key national and provincial cultural organizations to achieve shared cultural objectives, including infrastructure renewal and cultural tourism promotion.
*** Culture Programs Unit - coordinated and managed all ministry programs and grants for the full range of stakeholder organizations, provided cultural sector partners with one-window customer service.
*** Culture Services Unit - developed and coordinated guidelines and tools for service delivery, provided advice and interpretation of relevant legislation and conducted stakeholder education, training and outreach on key cultural initiatives.  
The cornerstone of the National Front's manifesto, since 1974 has been the compulsory repatriation of all "non-White" or "coloured" immigrants:In the past, the National Front did not oppose white immigration into Britain.
Ted Budden, a former organiser for the party in the 1980s proclaimed that white immigrants such as Poles in Britain would not be repatriated, adding: "Ah, it's the Poles who are the most forthright in the fight against coloured immigrants everywhere".
The National Front's manifesto has also called for white emigrants to the Commonwealth countries to return to Britain, claiming: "These immigrants should be given completely free entry into Britain and full rights of British citizenship".
The National Front in its political manifestos published in 1997 and 2001 reiterated its pledge to repatriate "all coloured immigrants and their offspring".
The party's policy as of 2012 on immigration remains unchanged in regards to its compulsory repatriation policy for non-whites:The party, however, now opposes further white immigration into Britain, excluding some cases:Unlike non-white immigrants, the National Front has no policy to repatriate white immigrants already settled in Britain.
While supporting withdrawal from the European Union, the National Front wants to create greater cultural links between Europe, what it calls the "White nations".
The party claims to stand for "white family values" and the "Fourteen Words", a white nationalist slogan that states: "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children."
The party works in open cooperation with the white supremacist and neo-Nazi website Stormfront.
In recent years the party has been in conflict with the British National Party over such issues as the BNP's attempts to present a more moderate image, such as shifting its policy from compulsory to voluntary repatriation and opening its membership to non-whites.
The NF's former national chairman, Tom Holmes, condemned the BNP as no longer being a white nationalist party for having a Sikh columnist in its party newspaper. 
With the winding down of the radical phase of the Cultural Revolution in 1969 and 1970, the revolutionary committees became increasingly bureaucratic and an organisational and ideological formality.
Although originally tasked with the representation of the Cultural Revolution's mass organisations (the Red Guards and the worker's groups), the dispersal of these mass groups made the revolutionary committees increasingly defunct, especially as the Party had regained administrative control of China.
However, they were maintained for their increasingly effective bureaucratic role (they were more efficient than the conventional Party apparatus of government) and as the leadership did not want to undermine the ideological success of the Cultural Revolution.
The future role of the revolutionary committees was to be formalised at the Fourth National People's Congress held in January 1975.
This congress ratified a new version of the constitution of the People's Republic of China, in which the revolutionary committees were established as permanent fixtures of the country's administration, but they were not given any role in the formulation of policy.
In addition, the three members of the 'triple alliance' principle on which the revolutionary committees were founded were redefined as 'the old, the middle aged and the young'.
However, in 1978, after an eleven-year history, revolutionary committees were abolished by the post-Mao government.