Budgets and the breaking of hearts
People talk about creative talent as being a ‘gift’. But ultimately, for most creators, it’s a gift that you give to your community and the wider world. And it is often a heartbreaking venture, not least because it can involve huge financial sacrifices.
Many writers and artists spend years on end creating work that they hope will bring joy and meaning to other people. Few artists will gain financial success, even when their work is loved by many.
Yesterday I sent off a submission to the Senate Inquiry into the impact of cuts to funding of the Australia Council for the Arts. It was one of the most difficult things I’ve written in a while because it forced me to confront how hard it can be to make a living when you choose to follow your passion.
The Australian government has cut over 100 million dollars from arts funding in the 2015 Budget. Art is important to everyone, not just the artists who create it. If you read, draw, create, enjoy film, theatre or any art form, these government policies will have an impact on your life.
Following is my full submission. Some of the points may seem a little technical if you’re not familiar with the proposed changes but I urge every Australian to consider contacting their local member of government to let them know how much they value books, art, music, theatre and film to ensure the government doesn’t push through these damaging policies.
Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee
PO Box 6100
Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600
RE: Impact of the 2014 and 2015 Commonwealth Budget decisions on the Arts and the appropriateness of the establishment of a National Programme for Excellence in the Arts
I am deeply alarmed by the decisions made about Federal arts funding in the 2014 and 2015 Budget and the proposed changes to Australia Council funding.
I am a full-time writer of books for children and young adults and I am fortunate to be able to live from my work. My novels have won many awards and been published internationally. Most of my books are historical fiction with a deep focus on Australian history and culture. These books are read and studied in schools and universities in the UK, USA, Germany and India as well as in Australia. Without the support of the Australia Council’s new work grants to individual writers it would have been impossible for me to create a body of Australian work with an international reach.
My family has worked in the Arts for five generations. Although I publish under the name Murray, my father was the sculptor Guy Boyd and dozens of members of my family, including my adult children, have spent their lives dedicated to building a vibrant Australian arts community, often in extremely difficult circumstances.
I remember, as a teenager, when my father told me about the establishment of the Australia Council for the Arts and the excitement felt by many of our friends and family that, at last, Australian artists were being taken seriously. It was a turning point not only for Australian artists but for Australian cultural identity. In my lifetime I have seen Australian artists move from being complete outsiders who were treated with suspicion by the wider community to become valued, dynamic and engaged participants in every facet of the Australian experience. Much of this is due to the existence of the Australia Council for the Arts.
In the last few decades, Australian artists have ‘punched above their weight’ both at home and abroad. When artistic expression flourishes the flow-on benefits to the wider community are immense. The fact that creative industries are growing at almost double the rate of the broader economy is indicative that Australians have grown to value artistic pursuit. Sadly, too many artists are struggling to maintain a decent standard of living. It is heartbreaking to see young people enter the arts full of passion and then watch them lose heart as they battle to establish a viable long-term career. As a small nation, we need government policies that generously fund individual artists as well as the institutions that employ them to make it possible for artists to engage with their communities and lead meaningful and productive lives.
In the 1950s and 1960s, many Australian artists felt obliged to leave Australia to further their careers, including my uncles Arthur Boyd and Sidney Nolan. Sadly, the creative drain to larger markets is still in operation, robbing us of many talented young artists. Despite the pull of foreign markets, the Australia Council has helped make it possible for thousands of artists to stay integrated in their local communities, bringing a richness of cultural experience to every Australian. De-stabilising the Australia Council will have repercussion not just for Australian artists but for every member of the wider community.
As a writer, I am particularly distressed that the proposed NPEA makes no reference to the literary arts. The Literature Section of the Australia Council had one of the smallest pools of available funding. It is utterly galling to see that literature is not listed as an eligible art-form within the draft NPEA guidelines.
I was on the steering committee that helped secure Melbourne’s status as a UNESCO City of Literature. The impact of the NPEA on arts funding could potentially jeopardise Melbourne’s ability to maintain the cultural standards necessary to retain this status. To lose our designation as a City of Literature would be an international embarrassment and an indicator of a culture in regression.
The fall-out of cuts to funding of arts programming in major institutions will also have a demoralising impact not simply on those institutions but on the artists they will no longer be able to employ. It will further reduce the possibility of Australian artists living from their work. The establishment of a second arts funding body such as the NPEA would duplicate existing infrastructure and grow bureaucracy at the expense of the artists they are theoretically meant to be supporting and encouraging.
I am also extremely concerned about accountability issues in relation to the proposed changes to arts funding and the potential impact on freedom of expression. An independent arm’s length statutory body free from political influence is the only viable model for arts funding. Without transparency, the wider community are denied comment on where arts funding is allocated. No funding model is perfect but the only way to ensure the process is dynamic and open to improvement is to maintain transparency and independence from political and corporate agendas.
The use of the term “Excellence in the Arts” is bewildering. Judging creative excellence is invariably a hit-and-miss process, particularly as new, innovative and groundbreaking work, is often misunderstood on first viewing. In many instances, only hindsight illuminates the excellence of a creative work. It is crucial that proposals for new work be assessed by independent assessors and peer reviewers from the relevant arts industries who can embrace a broad definition of the term ‘excellence’.
Another alarming aspect of the NPEA is that although the guidelines say the creation of new work will be a priority, individual artists are not eligible for funding. This completely excludes the majority of writers and artists from applying and fails to acknowledge the many long, hard hours that artists must spend alone in order to create new work. It preferences institutions and bureaucracies at the expense of individual creators.
I hope the inquiry will see fit to advise a reversal of the cuts to the Australia Council and that the Australian community can be assured that federal arts funding will continue to be administered through accountable, arms-length, peer-reviewed processes.
Countless artists and writers feel despair at the direction of current government arts policies. Despair and poverty do not nurture vibrant art.