Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Hansard source

Australian artists would be justified in believing that the coalition harbours a latent, sometimes visible, hostility to them and their calling. I have argued in other places that the absence of genuine and regular expressions of support and encouragement for the arts in all its myriad forms from the Prime Minister and senior ministers is emblematic of the Howard government’s attitude to the arts in Australia.

There have been no voices raised by government ministers to defend artists’ freedom of expression. Instead, the coalition—purvey-ors of ersatz jingoism and faux nationalism—rarely speak to praise the great reservoir of artistic work and the ongoing current and contemporary expressions of creativity, the poems, the plays and the pictures, that so form and inspire our national consciousness and our communities right around Australia. In fact, it is the case that the coalition are hostile and indifferent to Australian artists and their work, particularly if it seems to voice a view or an opinion contrary to theirs. The cultural, social and economic contribution the arts make to our country is neither recognised nor acknowledged. The coalition, for all their blue-blooded adherence to the monarchy and notions of excellence, remain bound in a cloth of ideology—it is postmodern philistinism of the worst kind.

In question time today, the Treasurer’s attack on Labor’s proposals to develop social security and an arts policy made that clear. He is presumably unaware of the average yearly income of working artists in Australia—around $12,000—and that many working artists do indeed at different times in their lives interact with the social security system. He is also clearly unaware that Labor’s ideas, drawing on experience in other countries, are to enable the social security system to better equip artists for future work—what a radical notion—so that people might earn more income to feed their families. Yes, Treasurer, artists do have families too. Instead, the member for Higgins chose to belittle artists. He said:

What exactly is keeping them from producing their art? ... ‘Poor old artists—they are on welfare and they do not have enough time to paint. We had better intervene.’

Then:

I do not think that is so onerous that somebody who is on welfare needs more time to produce their art.

What a cheap, glib and completely out-of-touch characterisation of Australia’s working artists. In fact, enabling some of the poorest working people in Australia to reduce their time on welfare and increase their job-seeking capacity is Labor’s intention. But the Treasurer is in complete ignorance of that necessary and proper public policy goal.

Instead, this now tragic figure, he who would be Prime Minister but is destined, it seems, by his own lack of courage and imagination—a quality that Australian artists have in abundance—to play second string has decided to attack those who play first string, those artists who by their creative endeavour add immeasurably to the soul of Australia, those artists who enrich our lives through the many forms of work that they produce—music, painting, poetry, sculpture, digital art.

In all the forms available to human expression, Australian artists are shaping and informing our character, and nourishing our democracy and our sense of who we are. Yet today in question time in the House of Representatives the Treasurer in the Howard government chose instead to denigrate them, to belittle them and to abuse them. What a shocking display of philistinism and ignorance from this person who will never lead this country. The Howard government team is truly no longer deserving of the support or, indeed, of any respect from the Australian population.

See this speech in context