Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Creative Australia Bill 2023, which is cognate with the Creative Australia (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023. The purpose of the Creative Australia Bill is to put in place legislation, as set out in the explanatory memorandum, to provide for Creative Australia as a modern entity with expanded functions, responsibilities and new governance structure.

Creative Australia will oversee support for contemporary music and safe and respectful workplaces for artists and arts workers, as set out in Revive: a place for every story, a story for every place, Australia's national cultural policy. As the EM goes on to explain:

The Bill continues the body corporate previously in existence under the Australia Council Act 2013 (old Act) but under the new name, Creative Australia. The Creative Australia (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023 (Transitional Bill) accompanying this Bill will repeal the old Act, in addition to providing for various transitional matters.The Bill establishes the new Board, and the Board is the governing and accountable authority for Creative Australia.

Very confusingly, I have to say, it says:

The Board will retain the name "Australia Council Board" to maintain its connection to the creation of the Australia Council by the Whitlam Government in 1975.

This gives rise to the question: why not just keep calling the entire body the Australia Council? We now have a situation where Creative Australia has been formed, creating a new entity, but is very confusingly maintaining the name of the old agency by calling the board the Australia Council Board. This is, frankly, less than desirable and extremely confusing, to say the least.

We are advised that the new Australia Council board will oversee support for contemporary music and safe and respectful workplaces for artists and arts workers. This bill also outlines responsibilities for Music Australia and creative workplace entities, which would be subject to the internal procedures and rules of Creative Australia. The Creative Australia board may give directions to entities.

Several aspects of these new arrangements are quite troubling. The first is that we are seeing a reweighting of spending towards the proliferation of Commonwealth arts officials at the expense of real frontline arts activities. According to the budget, the average number of staff of the Australia Council will increase by 32 per cent, from an estimated 108 in 2022-23 to 143 in 2023-24. The government has announced $199 million of funding for the new body over these four years. It is, as I said, concerning as to how the government has even structured these arrangements.

But what is particularly concerning is the reallocation of so much funding from frontline artists, from performers—from those who bring the arts to all Australians—to more bureaucrats. That is a very regrettable decision. This funding that I reference, the $199 million, has been redirected from a number of places, with the government having cancelled several programs funded under the previous coalition government, including the temporary support fund and the balance of the Location Incentive Program. Every dollar which goes to fund more bureaucrats is a dollar which cannot go to artists, performers and people in the arts sector who provide real ascetic experiences for Australian. This kind of inexplicable tinkering with arts budgets is an increasingly familiar feature of Minister Burke's administration of the arts portfolio.

Consider, for instance, the perplexing appearance and disappearing of Minister Burke's Live Performance Support Fund. This was announced in the 22 October budget as part of a $38.6 million Supporting the Arts program. It was supposedly going to deliver funding for plays, concerts and festivals from November 2022 through to February 2023. But after that announcement absolutely nothing more was heard of it, and the May budget confirmed the demise of the program—extraordinarily, without a dollar being spent.

There is a very clear difference between the Albanese Labor government and the coalition when it comes to how we fund the arts. The coalition's focus was on stimulating as many new events, shows, festivals and productions as possible and making sure that as many Australians as possible could enjoy what the arts sector put on offer, no matter where it was—in the big cities, in regional cities, in small towns or in remote communities. In fact, very proudly, under our $200 million Restart Investment to Sustain and Expand Fund, known as the RISE fund, 540 shows and events all around Australia were funded. The coalition even allocated a further $20 million towards this program in the March 2022 budget, but the new minister cancelled it. He didn't just cancel it; he actually killed it dead. This was $20 million which could have been put to work as early as May or June of last year towards stimulating more arts activities. So, it's very, very disappointing that this further investment announced by the coalition was cut by the now Albanese government. It now appears that the Albanese government is more interested in supporting bureaucrats in the arts industry than the frontline performers and artists who desperately need this support.

Allocating arts funding is not easy. We understand that. Whatever the government does, we appreciate that some people will be disappointed. But certainly those Australians who felt our nation was suffering from a dire shortage of Commonwealth arts officials are few and far between. In my travels, wherever I go—and I'm sure this experience is shared by my coalition colleagues—I don't have too many people coming up to me and saying, 'Please, can we have more funding for Commonwealth arts bureaucrats.' So this decision is very, very disappointing. During the coalition's time in government, I can confidently say that when Minister Fletcher was the minister for the arts he was never once approached by an Australian saying: 'Minister, do you know what we need? We need more Commonwealth arts officials.'

Another very concerning aspect of this government's approach to this new entity is what we are likely to see when it comes to the continuity of members of the Australia Council. Of the current 12 members, quite a few have only recently been appointed and have only served a very short term. We are very concerned that we will see at least some of those members, particularly those perceived as being ideologically tainted by any hint of an association with the coalition, being dumped by this minister. We are very, very concerned that the government will seek to highly politicise this new body and not pay due respect to those members who have been appointed to the Australia Council.

I say this because, on coming to government, the Albanese government and the Prime Minister in particular made a commitment to Australians that the government would not play politics, that the government would continue its promise to Australians to be transparent and to conduct its government with appropriate integrity. But through a series of terrible broken promises and very bad decisions over more than 12 months we have seen the government fail that transparency test over and over again.

Frankly, we believe that Australia is already rich with arts bureaucrats. We do not believe that this country needs any more. We believe that, in terms of the funding that is available, this country needs more support for our artists, our frontline performers. That would help support a new wave of artists in an industry which is tough at the best of times. It's really tough as an artist. No matter what sort of artist you are, there is a lot of time when you are not on stage, when you are not performing and when you're not exhibiting. So we think that every single dollar matters. That's particularly so during Labor's cost-of-living crisis. While we see the government prioritising a name change and a larger board, we see so many Australians struggling with skyrocketing costs of living, skyrocketing bills, dramatic increases in mortgage repayments, dramatic increases in rents and dramatic increases in their HECS debt.

The coalition, despite all the rhetoric from the current minister, has a very, very strong record of support for the arts. In the 2021-22 financial year, when it was so tough during COVID and the arts industry was hit so hard, our Liberal-National government delivered record arts funding of over $1 billion. No Labor government has ever matched this level of funding for the arts. While the coalition government's focus was on stimulating more arts activity, the present government has a very different focus. More arts officials is their solution to all the so-called needs. So the two bills before the Senate are reflective of the very different philosophy and very different focus of the current government compared to the previous government. While we are supporting these bills, we remain profoundly disappointed in the government's focus and lack of focus on the arts funding that is desperately required in this country.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in favour of this particular package of bills today—the Creative Australia Bill 2023 and the Creative Australia (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023. This is an important step forward. Our arts industry and creative workers right across the country have suffered over a decade of funding cuts, dismissals and being ignored.

That all came to a crunch, of course, during the COVID period. It was the arts and creative workers whose jobs were cut and workplaces were shut down literally overnight. They were the first to be caught in the COVID lockdowns, and they were the last to come out and start recovering. In those first crucial months, it was disappointing to see the former government, the Morrison government, do very little to support artists and creative workers to get through. It was only by dragging the former government kicking and screaming that they finally acknowledged that some support was needed. But, of course, that was just the tip of the iceberg.

It had been a decade of running down our cultural institutions, of dismissing the importance of the creative industries in our broader economy, of dismissing and ridiculing even the support for the creative education programs, whether music, art or drama, in our schools and broader education institutions. It had been attacked, cut, attack, cut for well over a decade.

Hundreds of thousands of workers in this country are in our creative industries. They contribute hugely to our national economy. Their contribution to our national identity, to our global democracy, to our soft diplomacy, to our education and to our community social cohesion is priceless. Yet, year after year, we see our creative industries put in the too-hard basket and at the bottom of the pile when it comes to government funding.

I welcome this piece of legislation. It is one small step to starting to restore the huge amount of pressure our creative workers have been under for far too long. But it's important to acknowledge in this debate today that there is a massive funding shortfall in relation to delivering the promises that have been made by the current government.

This Creative Australia Bill creates a new framework for what has previously been known as the Australia Council. It broadens the ability for this particular agency to ensure it touches on a broader range of workers and important elements and programs of our creative industries, but the bill doesn't have the funding that is going to be needed to really make this new agency zing.

The incorporation of Music Australia under this new banner is a very welcome move, something the Greens campaigned for long and hard. But, again, a new agency, a new program and a new set of legislative instruments are only as good as the funding given to make sure they can actually do the job and get the outcomes intended.

Artists' jobs are real jobs. The creative industry is an industry of genuine, real workers and businesses. In fact, the creative industries are made up mostly of small business across this country—often sole traders or small businesses working hard to contribute not only to their local community but also to the broader economic success of this country. There are also more women employed in our creative industries than almost every other industry in the country.

Most creative workers struggle because they are the first, the original, gig workers. We hear a lot about the gig industry in the tech space these days. But, broadly speaking, the creative industry was the original gig industry, and they still continue to struggle with the gig-to-gig arrangements. We to get that fixed as well. Our artists, particularly our performing artists, deserve minimum pay. They deserve a minimum wage for the work that they do. I note that that is not part of this package—but it is something that the government needs to consider. If there is a Labor government in office, surely the Labor government of the day should be considering a minimum wage for creative workers, just like we expect a minimum wage for everyone else.

Our creative industries are the future of our economy going forward. Our creative industries ensure innovation, creative thinking and problem solving—all skills that we desperately need in our new economy and for future jobs. It is disappointing that, when the Minister for the Arts, Mr Tony Burke, announced Labor's policy, which included the Creative Australia package, that there was no extra support for arts education in our schools. If we want to ensure that our kids have the skills and the abilities for what the future economy and future workforce looks like we need to make sure that they have access to creative learning. That means art classes, music classes and drama classes. Every child in this country should have the right to learn music and art, and at the moment they don't.

It might be okay for those kids whose parents are able to afford the private school fees. But, if you are one of the majority of Australian young students, you don't go to private school; you go to the local public school. At the local public school there is no guarantee that you can learn art, drama or music—and there should be, If we want the brightest minds, the most creative thinkers and the most innovative workers for the future, all of the science, all of the studies and all of the evidence shows that arts and creative learning is the best way to achieve that.

The Greens will support this package. There are lots of good things in here, but we need to ensure the funding gap is met. I urge you: if you really care about the next generation of creative workers in this country, start funding art classes in schools. Make it a right of every student in this country—every child—to access music classes, art classes and performance classes. We will have a much better generation, fit for the future workforce, if we do that. I commend the bills to the Senate.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Creative Australia Bill 2023 and the Creative Australia (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023 are part of a series of bills that will support the implementation of Australia's national cultural policy, Revive. It's a policy we are deeply proud of, and it will start turning around a decade of neglect. Revive: a place for every story, a story for every place is a comprehensive suite of policies designed to empower our talented artists and our organisations to thrive, to grow and to feel empowered, unlocking new opportunities for artists to reach different audiences to tell their stories in their own compelling ways.

We believe Revive will bring the drive and direction that we need and a vision back into a $17 billion art industry in this country. There has been a lost decade of federal policy drift, funding neglect and just a shameful neglect of the cultural beating heart of this country. The arts and culture sector deserves—

Point of order: I sat and listened painfully to Senator Henderson, and I would suggest she does the same. The policy is supported by $286 million in dedicated funding over four years. It will support the revival of respect and investment in this critical industry. The four interconnecting pillars of this policy are the framework to build and to grow upon. Pillar 1 is First Nations first; pillar 2 is a place for every story; pillar 3 is centrality of the artist; pillar 4 is strong cultural infrastructure; and pillar 5 is engaging the audience. They work together to give us the framework to build, to improve, to respect and to grow. Revive recognises the important role of culture and arts in developing our national identity, enabling reconciliation and healing, promoting social cohesion and encouraging economic growth.

At the centre of Revive is the establishment of Creative Australia, which will be facilitated by the passage of this legislation. Under this legislation, Creative Australia will be the government's new principal arts investment and advisory body—not just public servants, as has been suggested. Creative Australia will expand on and modernise the work of the Australia Council. The additional funding of over $200 million over four years will restore significant swathes of money cut by the previous government. Creative Australia will strengthen the capacity of the Australia Council and provide for a greater strategic oversight and engagement across the sector to ensure that funding decisions continue to be made on the basis of artistic merit, at arm's length from the government, which we believe is the appropriate way to do it.

It will also include the establishment of the independent bodies and funds for First Nations arts and culture, contemporary music and writers as well as a centre for artists and entertainment workers. Later this year the subsequent bills will introduce and formally establish Music Australia and the centre for arts with it. These bodies will be critical to bringing forward this vision for a stronger arts sector, and that is critical. The Albanese Labor government is committed to improving the quality of Commonwealth investment in the arts sector and to strengthening access to support for artists and art organisations. A properly resourced Creative Australia is key to delivering on these commitments.

In February the Senate referred the inquiry into the National Cultural Policy to the Senate Environment and Communications References Committee. We have had a hearing and had a range of submissions which have, so far, overwhelmingly supported the intent and the plan moving forward from the cultural policy. I want to thank all the organisations that have submitted to the inquiry, and the organisations who came along and engaged with the committee over this policy. As I say, they were overwhelmingly supportive of Revive as a policy, noting that the National Cultural Policy is a welcome first in developing contemporary and sustainable approaches to supporting Australia's arts, entertainment and cultural sectors. We heard significantly of those who had lost funding or had funding cut; that's all laid out in the evidence that was put to that inquiry.

I want to thank the national cultural institutes for their work and the evidence they provided. We were proud to announce in April that the National Library would receive a further $33 million in funding over four years, with Trove to be separately provided $9.2 million. Trove is such a critical resource, such a loved and valued resource, and it was left desperately underfunded due to the neglect of the former coalition government. Without this funding injection, Trove would not have been able to continue. I want to thank Trove for their commitment and the important work they do. I also want to acknowledge the impressive work of my dear friend and colleague Senator White in supporting the National Library and advocating for that important institution.

We also announced a significant amount of funding, $535.5 million, to nine key collecting institutions over four years—institutions that had also been significantly neglected, like the National Library, the National Gallery, the National Museum of Australia and the Museum of Australian Democracy at Old Parliament House. To ensure they can keep going, doing their significant work, we have to invest in them. I know that is important to a vast number of people in this chamber, and I thank each and every one of them for their advocacy on this issue.

Throughout the hearings we also heard from a range of live performance and music sector artists who are continuing to suffer following the COVID-19 pandemic and the decimation to their incomes and their livelihoods through the inability to perform live through that time. There were shutdowns, disruptions and supply chain issues, and extreme weather events were another factor—along with last-minute ticket sales, which have changed the shape of being able to project what income might be and how you break even on some of those gigs and festivals. We acknowledge the struggles of the sector and the struggles they have gone through in the last few years since the beginning of the pandemic. We are confident that the establishment of the Music Australia Council to sit within Creative Australia is going to make a difference to the planning, to the cohesion, to the opportunities that are there for those people.

The Albanese government is so proud of Australian culture. I am so proud of Australian culture. The beating heart of who we are and how we express ourselves as a country is inspiring. The National Cultural Policy is going to mark a new future, a new opportunity for us moving forwards to build that trust back, to build the opportunities and to make a fundamental difference to our arts and cultural sector in this country. I commend the bill to the Senate.

Perin Davey (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Creative Australia Bill 2023, which will effectively establish Creative Australia. I can guarantee you one thing, and that is that, if you go to the public service and ask for advice on how to streamline agencies, processes and principles, the answer will always be to create another agency—because more bureaucrats is always the solution. I get it; I totally understand: you want to create further career opportunities and pathways for yourselves. But it is not always the right thing to do.

I do support the Creative Australia Bill, because I support the intent of what the Creative Australia Bill is setting out to achieve. There are certainly aspects of the bill which are very welcome, including the recognition not only that we need to tell our own stories but also that Australians, regardless of heritage, background or geographic location, deserve to be able to access art, practise art, produce art, write their stories, sing their songs and perform on their stages. But, as always, the devil will be in the detail.

This bill creates the Australia Council Board, which will oversee Creative Australia. The Australia Council is being wound up, but we're still going to name the board the Australia Council Board. It is going to increase board from 12 to 14. That might be okay. They are going to be appointed by the minister. There is nothing in my reading of it that says it has to be a merits-based selection process or anything like that. This is a typical ministerial appointment process, which we on this side don't actually disagree with—because, as a minister, you are elected to make these tough decisions. We get lectured constantly from those on the other side that ministerial appointments are only jobs for the boys; yet, every time they set up a new body, they go down this path of having ministerial appointments. So what is it? Is it jobs for the boys, or do you actually agree that ministers are smart enough to make merits-based appointments?

With a new board of 14, I certainly hope that there is a more genuine geographic distribution than is currently on the Australia Council board. They are all imminent people, but there is only one member of the current board based outside of a capital city. That is Mr Philip Watkins from Alice Springs, and he is absolutely deserving of being on this board. But wouldn't it be good if there were more than just one regional voice on this board that is looking at and advising—to use the terminology from Senator Grogan—an investment body? It is an investment body and this board will advise them. Wouldn't it be good if we had more than just one regional voice?

I will tell you where art begins. It begins in the grassroots. It begins from the very foundation. As Senator Hanson-Young said, it begins in the classroom and it begins at home. But it doesn't matter whether that home is in Bondi or whether it is in the red dirt of Central Australia—there are amazing stories. I can attest to one story of a fabulous little organisation, Outback Theatre for Young People, which is headquartered in Deniliquin, my hometown. Yes, once upon a time I was on their board and I was associated with them as a chair. They have a staff of 1.5 full-time employees. They manage a turnover of around $300,000 to $400,000 in a good year. It's all grants based. So those 1.5 employees have to write the grants, have to come up with the programs, have to source artists to embed, because their practice model is that they embed in regional communities. They've done circus works at Balranald. They've done work with the School of the Air out at Wilcannia. They've worked with new migrant Australians in Swan Hill to help create art that creates understanding, that works with people to bring them all together. And this is with 1.5 people.

When you're talking regional arts, the return on investment is phenomenal. But, when you're talking about people who come from our capital cities, who look at how many audience numbers they can get, they look at the black and white—What is the audience number? How much can the audience pay? What's our return on investment in dollar value? It's incomparable. You can't compare arts in low-socioeconomic areas where mums and dads can't afford to pay $20 see their child on stage. But they want to see their child on stage. They can't afford to pay for lighting and big production costs, but old Fred from down the road is happy to turn the spotties in his ute on to light up the back of a flat bed truck so those kids can perform on that stage. That establishes a sense of community and fosters dreams. A lot of the kids I'm talking about who've worked on these productions through this little organisation have gone on to do other things. They dream big, and that's a great thing.

Where do you think you get the Australian Ballet ballerinas? They're not all born and bred in leafy suburbs of Sydney or Melbourne. Some of them went to the Dubbo Ballet School. Good on them! We want to see more of that. What I can't see in the detail of this bill is how we're going to make sure that grassroots arts are funded and that they're absolutely supported. How is this bill making it easier for organisations like the Outback Theatre for Young People to put in grant applications so that they're not competing against the big city based theatre companies? It should be more like for like that they're competing against.

I do appreciate and acknowledge that in the Creative Australia brochures that have been put out there is a commitment to increase the regional arts funds. I absolutely welcome that, but I will be watching very closely to see how that's rolled out. One thing we do know is that, while much is being made about the new body getting an extra $199 million over four years, it's not new money. It's money that's been taken from other areas. It's been redirected from a number of places. The current government has cancelled several programs that our government established specifically, as Senator Hanson-Young said, for during COVID, when the arts industry was on its knees. Some of them, like the RISE Fund, were very welcome and very good at achieving their intent of funding artists on the ground, of getting artists out and practising. It wasn't funding to pay for an extra 32 per cent increase in staffing, as the current budget has identified. The average staffing level for the Australia Council will go up by 32 per cent in 12 months. That's not artists being supported. That's not artists practising their art. That's not audiences getting to enjoy Australian culture. That's just the version of streamlining that we see repeatedly over time.

As I said earlier, I will be supporting this, because I really do genuinely support the intent. But I will be looking at the detail and its implementation. I will be watching the results, and I will be asking at estimates, as I do and as I have done for the last four years, how much of the spend is going to hit the ground in the regions, and how much of our representation and how much recognition are we giving to our really good artists in the regions who can step up, who have the skills and the knowledge, so that they can be represented on the Creative Australia board. So I will support it. I will watch it closely. I thank the government for their significant consultation on preparing this bill. But our support for this bill today is not a blank cheque to ignore artists and just fund more public servants.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a servant to the many amazing people who make up our great Queensland community—our one great Queensland community—I rise to speak on the Creative Australia Bill 2023. It is legislation that is so out of touch that it's my duty—indeed my pleasure—to make remarks on this legislation, which implements a previous bill to modernise the Australia Council. 'Modernisation' is a word few Australians wish to hear when it comes to the arts. Modern art, with its ugly exterior and substandard political shouting, is the reason so many Australians turn their back on the local arts community, sadly, choosing instead to seek their cultural fix overseas, amongst the historical buildings and ruins and the splendour of Western civilisation. A single marble pillar from the Roman age holds more fascination to the typical Australian than the entire offering of last year's Australia Council. Despite the terrifying amount of money spent on the arts, it's not the beating heart of Australian culture. It's a desert of talent, accentuated with outcrops of brutalism, obscurity, absurdity—installations made from literal trash, the obscene, the lazy and the inconsequential masquerading as talent.

Creative Australia celebrates the primacy of left-wing controlled politics over entertainment, humour, culture and class. Minister Burke has taken up his position on the throne presiding over this self-indulgent mess—this slop. To stop the overpaid leaders of the art world snapping at his ankles, he's decided to throw even more taxpayer money at them. It's a terrible shame, because the real artists and writers of Australia are forced to leave our country and seek a career overseas, where the merit of their work is valued above the artist's identity.

Creative Australia and Minister Burke are failing the real arts community and, with that, failing everyday Australians, failing our country. Remember, this is the era when local councils erect bits of junk in the town square while tearing down bronze and stone statues—works of real, actual art, erected to honour the real builders of Australia. Our so-called arts community is busy deconstructing its historical betters while replacing them with nothing of lasting merit. It's no wonder the Australia Council had to spend money on surveys, trying to work out why their performances are empty and, as a result, changing their name, not their product. That's what seems to be the outcome.

Modernisation, the key part of this proposal, can be best illustrated by using a scene outside the Melbourne art gallery. By the way, yes, this really happened. Imagine this: customers were queueing to gain access to a collection of Renaissance masters while a modern piece of installation art outside involved adults dressed as sheep, pretending to eat the grass and baa baaing at the customers. Can you believe this!

James McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, I do!

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's the sad part! Considering this was before the age of COVID, perhaps we should have taken that as a warning for how eager modernity is to embrace a sheeplike existence. Suck it up!

In the middle of an economic crisis, as a result of government overreaction and wastage in the COVID years, the government has decided to undertake an unnecessary refurnishing of the arts, using money taken from places where it would have actually done some damn good. Modernising the arts and needlessly rebranding its bureaucracy is something a bored government does on a slow day when it's rolling in a surplus, not when we're in a crisis—a financial crisis, an economic crisis, a moral crisis, a social crisis.

First, we sat through Minister Burke and his 14 town hall meetings, worth $40,000, so that he could introduce himself to the cultural sector, apparently forgetting that he is caretaker of an existing and well-known department and not a freshly appointed CEO with a fragile ego. Instead of spending $40,000 of taxpayers' money on himself, perhaps Minister Burke could have given that money to the cultural sector and sent out a few tweets saying, 'Hi,' or maybe 'G'day,' and called the whole thing done. Maybe that's what he could have done.

The rest of the legislation behaves like the Tim Tam genie's infinite arts grants. We are told that in order to deliver the national cultural policy, of which this legislation is in service, $286 million will be provided in the next financial year—$286 million in 12 months. That's more than a quarter of a billion dollars. For perspective, $200 million is roughly the cost of the one million mental health appointments that the Labor government decided to cut from Medicare last year. Labor has looked at where that money should be spent and decided it's better off being handed over to this new Creative Australia and not on psychology sessions for Australians struggling with mental health.

What is it that the Australian taxpayer gets for that $286 million, aside from a bloated bureaucracy that spends its time drinking champagne and shaking hands, perhaps calling patrons of fine arts 'sheep' again? When was the last time the Australia Council showed some real diversity and inclusion and funded artworks and cultural endeavours from conservative artists? Where are the grants to preserve colonial artists and the enormous work they did recording Australia's pioneer days? What about artworks dedicated to the Western values of liberty and individualism? What could be more important? Artists protesting against the cruelty of big-state authority and abuse during the COVID years perhaps? That'll be a long wait, a very long wait. Their voices are exiled from this so-called inclusive publicly funded boondoggle.

The sort of arts and culture funded by the previous Australia Council is not rich and diverse; it's a saturated market of climate-apocalypse propaganda, seen through the prism of race and religion and ideology. Their corporate strategy says exactly that:

It includes emphases on access and equity, advocacy for the vital role of arts and culture, and investing in arts and creativity that reflects and connects the many communities that make up contemporary Australia.

It doesn't say, 'We are committed to funding excellence and achievement for talented individuals in the arts community.' It doesn't say that. The Australia Council even threw in some World Economic Forum propaganda for good measure, stating:

The technologies of the fourth industrial revolution are transforming and disrupting industries, economies, and how we interact with our world and each other.

Wonderful! This isn't art. It's politics—international, unelected bureaucratic politics and ideology of the elites, the globalist predators, masquerading as art and funded by taxpayers. What was it doing on the Australia Council website? Why? What was it? And will Creative Australia adopt the same fealty to foreign powers? Two hundred and eighty-six million dollars is the reward for hijacking the arts sector to promote a woke ideology over an artistic one. I'll say that again: a woke ideology over an artistic ideology, an artistic culture. The inclusion of Aboriginal art as the predominant destination of Creative Australia funding suggests this is another bribe to support the Voice. It's coming at us from every angle. That shows that they're actually desperate.

Creative Australia is advocating that the arts become all about 'a place for every story and a story for every place'. I'm sure the public is trembling in anticipation of that agenda—'agenda' being the operative word. It suggests the government is doubling down on woke and calling it art. The government hasn't realised that, in order to increase the reach of arts and culture, you let the free market direct the program. That ensures that the program meets people's real needs. You allow the people to reward artwork that appeals to and connects with them. That ensures that it meets people's real needs.

Artists that produce rubbish should not be funded simply because they flatter the Labor-Greens-teal government. Their work is drowning out more deserving artists who are rejected because Creative Australia does not like their politics. There's a reason working-class families in Australia save up for years to fly to the other side of the world and stand beneath Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling. When was the last time a product of the Australia Council left millions of international tourists in awe, questioning the human limits of skill and vision? The answer is never—never—because you cannot buy culture, no matter how much taxpayer money Minister Burke throws at it.

Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today with some cognitive dissonance, as a boy from the Hunter Valley who grew up on sports, particularly motor sports and rugby league and who is a member of the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee that examined these bills and similar ones. As the previous speaker, Senator Roberts, mentioned, the minister has been spending $40,000 worth of taxpayers' money, familiarising himself with the arts. I've got to say my wife, the good doctor Bethan Cadell, has spent thousands of dollars familiarising me with the arts over the last few months, to her great joy, going through my wages that the taxpayers give me. We've seen Come From Away in Newcastle, we've seen MAMMA MIA! in Sydney and, also, Tina the musical, just over the last three months.

As well as that, I've really enjoyed meeting new graduates from arts colleges, talking to them about their futures, how they see money being spent and what gaps they see in that market. At this point I'd like to thank the chair of the environment and communications committee—which is meeting right now—Senator Grogan. Something that came out of that was that inquiry is that there is no single library anymore of plays for semiprofessional or amateur theatres to be able to go to; there is no single source for grabbing licensed works that they can operate. There is no single website where these people can go and apply for auditions, see what's open, and those sorts of things. That has been progressed through this committee, as I have been slowly educated in the ways of those more cultured than me.

James McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A quick learner!

Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm trying, Senator! But I take up some of the points of the previous speaker. What is art? What is culture? This is what it comes down to. We don't live to work; we work to live—and we live to love. And art should bring joy, art should make you think and art should educate, but art should be balanced. For so long, the arts and culture area has gone along in trends and waves, and ups and downs. It's not about one government or other. There are creative bursts. There are things to talk about. There are discussions that go on. So it's an area, as I am becoming familiar with it, that we must support.

The coalition will be supporting this bill today, as I said. But, as Senator Davey previously said, let us not forget the regions. I think Senator Henderson also said this, but, out of all the people I've engaged with who are teaching me what I need to know, none of them have said that we need more bureaucrats—not one. I think this bill increases some of the departmental staff by 32 per cent, but that's not what they're seeing. They're seeing more help at the beginning of their careers. What was really interesting was the difference across different genres. If you're in film, screen or TV, there is help right at the beginning with things such as YouTube, self-made videos and self-made promotions. There's help at the top and a gap in the middle, in that transition from amateur to professional.

Yet an industry just as big in the arts and cultural portfolio is computer games, and that is coming through. I think there's a Treasury laws amendment with a digital games tax offset that will help that. There are directors and sound technicians that cross over, and all the things that happen there cross over into the film world. I look forward to that bill hopefully coming in next week before the financial year ends, which will assist them. They have help at the middle and top, but that beginning phase is difficult.

We need to open this access to all. I think there are different focuses to the funding that the coalition would have done, but we welcome any more funding going into this. We welcome the industry going into this area. What we would really like to see is some certainty in funding over an ongoing period, to allow people to make times and to see a certainty in their future. I still owe Aysha Galloway and her writing crew and some friends in Sydney. They gave me some tips, some pizza and a sit-down about where they see this going and what's going on in the future.

What is interesting is that art is not a thing anyone can define other than in the way that they see it. Culture is the same. For me, going to Mount Panorama, of all places, and seeing that white stone installation on the side of that hill moved something in me. It might not be what other people would see.

James McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's auto art!

Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It may be. It's a fine thing, but that is it—it's in the eye of the beholder. Culture is in the eye of the beholder: 'This is important to this; it makes me feel.' So I am very supportive of all things that we can do to do that. As I said, and as Senator Henderson said, there are differences in what we would spend on—maybe there would be some more grassroots spending. I hope and look forward to the department, especially the minister and Senator Grogan, helping us deliver this for the beginners.

Even schools came to me. I went and saw some school drama teachers. I was never overly good at drama. In school, if people had to wag, they would run away and get caught. I'd go and wait in the principal's office, because that's where people thought I would be normally, and I'd get away with it! But drama wasn't something I habitually attended. In talking to these people now, I understand that they see its role. A drama teacher from Belmont Christian College—I met her at an Anzac memorial—brought the kids to do some readings. She was talking about how drama sets you up for life and gives you the confidence to stand up somewhere—like here today—and talk. It's about having the confidence in yourself to learn, to be able to project and do these things.

So it is important, and this bill is important. As I said, there are minor differences. I'm proud to support it. The true thing going forward is that we have that continuity. If we develop the emerging talent and they don't have to travel overseas, as was mentioned before, and can stay in Australia—I know there are lots of things about content quotas and everything going forward at the moment—we will make that industry big enough. It's not just theatre, screen and film, live performance or music. It is everything. But we can work across these areas.

We're seeing film as an industry getting bigger. Having more Australian cultural content and defining what that is is important, because then we can go and produce the latest Marvel movie on the Gold Coast or Sydney. We produced Superman, I think, at NESCA House—a building at Newcastle university—but you couldn't recognise it as Newcastle. It was just a generic scene. So there is that difference between Australian made and Australian culture.

I think this bill will go some way towards helping define that. I think there's more work to be done. I don't think more bosses telling people how it's done will additionally help, but the process will start. We'll have a structure in place and we'll have a way to move forward, and that's why I commend this bill.

Debate interrupted.

Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! It being 1.30 pm, we will now move to two-minute statements.