Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to provide some comments on the tabling of the report Indigenous art: securing the future. I was a replacement for Senator Lundy on the Standing Committee on Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts for the purposes of this inquiry. I want to start by recognising the work of the secretariat. When reports are tabled, we often get to the end of our contributions in this chamber and forget to acknowledge the tireless work that we expect of committee secretariats, and the efforts that they undertake. I express our thanks to Dr Ian Holland, Peter Short, Dr Andrew Gaczol, Joanna Woodbury, Jacqueline Hawkins in particular and Mrs Dianne Warhurst.

This has probably been a longer inquiry than most of us who put it up originally had wanted it to be, but this secretariat managed to produce quite a number of position papers on issues that were raised in this inquiry. Since we received the first draft only two weeks ago, there has been a substantial amount of work in rewording a lot of it and rewriting a lot of the recommendations. That demands a large effort on the part of the secretariat, and minimal and very fast turnaround times. I want to place on record that their hard work and their efforts do not go unnoticed and are much appreciated.

I want to make some initial comments about Senator Kemp’s recollection of how this report and the inquiry came into being. I do not want to dwell too long on the politics of this, but a number of us had been pushing for a while for an inquiry into this sector. People may remember that I and, if I recollect correctly, some of the minor parties put up terms of reference in this chamber. That was at about the same time that Senator Kemp, who was at that time the Minister for the Arts and Sport, was circulating terms of reference among the industry. At the end of the day, we conceded to the wording that the government wanted. As they have the numbers in this chamber, we probably did not have much choice, but I do think we could have got this inquiry under way a lot sooner than we did.

We initially wanted to have this report completed in time for this year’s budget, but that was not to be. We now have it before us, and I hope that it is not shelved and forgotten by either party in the lead-up to the election this year. There are recommendations in here that commit to resourcing the sector, which I believe could be done now. I do not think they need to wait until next year’s budget. I would be looking to see, hopefully, this government respond to this report as quickly as possible.

This report is about anything but Indigenous art. This report is about proving to the Australian public and reaffirming to the industry that Indigenous art can be, and is, a very vibrant and economically viable industry for Indigenous people in this country. We heard that there had been some calculations that in the Central Australian area the industry was worth about as much as the cattle industry. But, when we look at the protection, the kudos and the national recognition that the cattle industry obtains, in comparison the Indigenous art industry has a long way to go.

This inquiry proved to me that there are Indigenous people in this country who paint to eat. It is as simple as that. When they are in abject poverty and are starving, they know that they can make a quick quid by producing a canvas, which they will sell at any price possible—usually not at its worth—in order to survive, if not that day then that week. These are some of the most talented artists that we have in this country. What we need to do as a nation is to pick up those artists and take them out of this poverty cycle by ensuring that they are supported, that the industry is well resourced and that they are painting.

This country and the international market want the product for its value. Indigenous artists need to be paid the thousands and thousands of dollars that their art is commanding on the market. I am not suggesting that it is not happening—it is happening in some cases. but there are art centres, such as the Papunya Tula industry, that have never received any government funding. In the course of this inquiry I was privileged to go out to Kintore and be part of the opening of their new art centre, which was totally funded by the work generated by the Indigenous artists of Papunya Tula. They are the tall poppies of the industry. We want to ensure that all of the other artists in the industry rise to that standard, but they will not do so unless everybody gets on board with resources and support.

I want to draw people’s attention to some of the major recommendations in the report. I think the most crucial one is that we make substantial statements about the benefits of art centres in communities. They play a pivotal role. This week, when this nation is uncovering the story in the Northern Territory of child sex abuse, art centres can play a major role by providing safe havens for families and providing them with economic opportunities. Art centres are places where Indigenous people can go in order to retain their culture, paint their culture, tell us about their culture and be adequately paid for the work that they produce. If we are to move people off the poverty merry-go-round that we sometimes keep them on—and I deliberately say ‘we’—then we have to be serious about committing resources to the arts industry.

Labor have suggested that $25 million be put towards the infrastructure of art centres so that people do have decent rooms with plenty of space for them to stretch canvas, mix paint and paint canvases that are huge in size. We suggest that the Indigenous commercial code of conduct that has been running in the industry for a very long period of time be finished. I say to the people in the industry: get on board and sign off on this very quickly, because Indigenous artists are waiting for it to happen. In respect of our recommendations about the code of conduct, we suggest that everybody opts in and makes sure that the industry operates under that code of conduct.

There is a huge role for the ACCC. I want to acknowledge and pay tribute to the ACCC for picking up what they perceive are possible breaches of the Trade Practices Act during this inquiry. They have already identified unconscionable conduct from some of the submissions. I thank the ACCC for acknowledging that there can be breaches of federal legislation in this industry. Finally someone is going to step up to the plate to have a really good look at this and make sure that the carpetbaggers that we talk about in this industry are brought to task. Perhaps we can do this is by strengthening the ACCC’s scrutiny of the industry through successful prosecutions and by educating Indigenous artists about their roles.

We need to ensure that urban Indigenous artists are not kept out of the loop and that they are actually recognised. We make a recommendation based on an Office of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health initiative last year, whereby they fully funded CDEP positions in Aboriginal medical services. There is a recommendation in the report that the Commonwealth, through the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, pursue the conversion of CDEP funded positions into full-time properly funded jobs. That will bring a stop to the poverty cycle in communities.

In conclusion, I want to draw people’s attention to the two areas where we have disagreed. The Labor Party believe we should get on board and implement a resale royalty regime as quickly as possible. We do make a comment that, during the inquiry, there was overwhelming support for keeping and retaining the permit system in the Northern Territory. Our comments in that regard are contrary to those of the majority of the committee in the tabled report.