Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for the Arts and Sport, Senator Brandis. Would the minister inform the Senate about the current state of the arts industry in Australia and how the Australian government has supported the arts? Is the minister aware of any alternative policies?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for the Arts and Sport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Senator Boyce, for that question. I know that this is an area that interests you a great deal. I am delighted to inform you, Senator Boyce, through you, Mr President, about the very strong support that the Australian government, throughout the life of the Howard government, has given to the arts in Australia. I am also, I am pleased to say, aware of alternative policies.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about the rodent? A memorial to the rodent?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for the Arts and Sport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Excuse me, Senator ‘Kim Il’ Carr, I am speaking.

Alan Ferguson (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Brandis, you will address the senator by his proper name.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for the Arts and Sport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw, Mr President. It was only an affectionate nickname. I have something of a weakness for affectionate nicknames.

Since the last Keating government budget in 1995 to this year’s 13th Howard government budget, funding for the arts in Australia has been increased from $410 million to $680 million, an increase of 65.8 per cent over that period. There have been increases in particular sectors of arts funding: an increase in funding to the Australia Council, which over the lifetime of the Howard government has had its funding increased from $73 million 12 years ago to $161 million this year, an increase of 110 per cent over the period; increases in funding of the visual arts and crafts strategy, including a 27 per cent increase in funding for that sector over the previous year; and an increase of 34 per cent in the major performing arts companies over the previous triennium. So there has been very, very strong support for the arts in Australia from the Howard government, not to mention, of course, the film package—which I am delighted the Senate passed yesterday—which invests $280 million over four years in the Australian film industry.

I want to get to some alternative policies. I could tell you, Senator Boyce, that one of the policies of the Australian Labor Party is to reduce funding to the arts. That has certainly been the experience of state Labor governments. The Australia Council has recently prepared a document of arts and cultural funding by state and territory governments for 2007-08, which discloses a reduction in arts funding by the New South Wales Labor government in the coming year of $19.8 million, or 6.5 per cent, and a reduction in arts funding by the Queensland government of $53.9 million, or 20.5 per cent. If you want to know what the Labor Party would do if they were in power, look no further than the state Labor governments that are in power.

In fairness, to give them their due, Mr Garrett, the shadow minister, produced a document—a very flimsy document—last Friday on federal Labor arts funding. They are going to have a review of the funding model of the Australia Council. That is on page 4. On page 5, we discover that they are going to have a review of the performance of ABAF, the Australian Business Arts Foundation. Then we go to page 7 and we find that we are going to have a review of the Regional Arts Australia strategy. And we only have to go over to page 8 to find that they will consider the review of the Australian National Academy of Music. I have not even read it very carefully, but that is four reviews in the first eight pages. Given that page 1 is a blank piece of paper, page 2 is a preamble, page 3 is a table of contents and page 4 is some rodomontade about the Howard government, that is not bad going at all. What you will find particularly interesting, Senator Boyce— (Time expired)

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I ask the Minister for the Arts and Sport if he could further elaborate on the alternatives that are not being proposed.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for the Arts and Sport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you so much, Senator Boyce. I will not weary you with all the other reviews in the remaining few pages of this very, very flimsy polemic. I have only got a minute. But I might mention what the Labor Party arts policy document does not cover. It says nothing about the visual arts other than some remarks about Indigenous art. When it comes to Indigenous art, the Australian Labor Party will have a review of policies in relation to the protection of Indigenous artists. There is nothing about the major performing arts companies. We are not even going to have a review of them, except of course the review of the Australian National Academy of Music. There is nothing, for instance, about NIDA and nothing about the Australian Ballet School. There is nothing—not a word—about infrastructure and no mention of literature other than in the context of Indigenous art, where we are going to have a review as to the availability of literature in the Indigenous sector. (Time expired)