Impact of the 2014 and 2015 Commonwealth Budget decisions on the Arts Submission 36

To the Committee Secretary, Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee

I am writing to express my concerns about the recent decision made by Minister Brandis to re-direct funds from the Australia Council to the National Program for Excellence and to offer something of my personal experiences and observations as a working artist. I have been busy launching two CDs, performing a 15hr concert at Dark MOFO, launching/directing a nine-day regional festival, and planning a series of 100 duets in November (I will play with 100 different people over 25 nights), so I have not had the time to put my thoughts on paper as yet, but I hope my response will help offer something for consideration.

Firstly I believe the impact of the 2014 and 2015 Commonwealth Budget decisions have been made with little regard for the health of the arts ecosystem. The decision to protect the funding for the major organisations is to be commended, but it should have applied across the board, rather than inflicting cuts only to the small and medium scale artists/organisations via Australia Council funding. If there were to be cuts, then they could have been shared in a more equitable fashion - everyone tightening their belt a little, rather than what has happened where some organisations/artists have suddenly had planned options closed to them, while others can continue with no change.

The concern about the impact of these Budget decisions on the health of the small to medium organisations is that it stifles, limits or kills the development of emerging and established artists that operate outside of the large organisations but have considerable impact economically and in terms of social wellbeing within and outside of their communities. And that this will impact greatly on the future of artistic excellence and endeavour in this country. Think of it like sports - various sporting codes like AFL and Tennis, put a lot of time and money into developing grass roots talent and support, which feeds into providing talent and an audience for the more elite levels. Arts works in the same way. It is not possible to expect a sportsperson to just emerge at an elite level without proper training, support and experience. Artists are the same.

For individual artists to have limited access to funding is a problem not just for the artist but for the industry around those individuals. Most of the grants that I have applied for and those that I have been fortunate enough to succeed with, have been for funds to pay for various services - be it recording costs, manufacturing costs, travel costs, accommodation, promotion, design, artist fees for other artists. Most of the time I have contributed personally with a mix of both in-kind and cash support for the funding I have sought. The money I have received as a funding recipient has usually gone out to a wide range of people. The positive side is that I have managed to further my career in some way, be it a new recording, a profile-building tour, supporting the presentation of a new project/event, professional development. But the money has invariably passed very quickly through my hands and into those of many and varied other services. The funding I have received usually requires other parties to be contributing, even if it is just the applicant. In this way funding does help to mobilise and leverage funds from other non-government sources, which is at the heart of supporting creative industries, but it does not necessarily support the artist at the centre of the activity. If for instance, musicians stop creating and recording music, that’s less work that recording engineers ges, its less that a designer gets, less entertainment that a venue can offer, less local content and telling of our particular Australian stories that gets heard on the radio, less instruments get learnt at school, less instruments that get bought, less economic activity in general. And it is these individual artists striving to develop and grow that are willing to do a lot for very little - someone like Wally de Backer () managed to get his last CD done on a low budget but become internationally massive. Maybe it was just me, but having played a session for the album for a couple of hundred dollars, I know personally it was done be people willing to make it happen, rather than relying on big dollars.

Individuals are more flexible to try things, be creative, innovative and take risks - larger organisations tend to needing to put bums on seats, cater to expectations (whether they are real or projected). Larger organisations often look to the maverick individual as a source of “street creed” or “youth appeal” or “cutting edge” etc… support for artists to develop their voices, their individuality, will give the larger arts community stronger capital from which to build upon. Jumping to talk more specifically about the Australia Council and the effects of the funding arrangements, I had great trouble with the language that Minister Brandis used in espousing the objectives and reasons for the NPEA, when I felt most of it could have applied just as easily to my perception of what the Australia Council already is committed to. I have always felt the need to present excellence in my projects or as the aspiration, in order to be competitive in the grant process. As I have said, I have always understood funding to be more than being given a handout, and that it has been necessary to have partners, develop a business plan, demonstrate understanding of the marketplace, have a product of strong artistic merit, show audience demand, etc. Understanding these as necessary elements for developing my artistic practice has assisted in my success with funding applications, just as it has helped with my non-funded activities as well. So in recognising these as important elements, I do agree with much of what Minister Brandis suggests is necessary to develop/encourage in artistic practice, but I would disagree that a new body is required. I feel that the Australia Council has been for years, what Minister Brandis suggests needs doing.

On the issue of arms-length funding and independence, this is of great concern. I have not participated on any of the peer panels for Australia Council, but I have been on a few for Arts Victoria and from those experiences, I feel that peer assessment practice may not be perfect but that it actually does a fairly good job of being broad and representative, and that it is not so easy for one person to have undue influence on the decision making. For the NPEA assessments to ultimately be moderated by the Minister, without necessarily being informed by artistic peers, strikes me as begin open to much more manipulation and bias, perceived or otherwise. One aspect of this seems already to be having effect, in that anecdotally, various organisations have not wished to discuss the Budget decisions, or that it is in their contractual obligations that they will not make comment. This is a frightening development if independence and freedom of expression is suppressed for fear of retribution through loss of funding and/or support.

I have received funding from the Australia Council and other various government bodies over many years. I have received (or not) received funding under both sides of politics being in power. I have been able to approach the Australia Council knowing that maybe there is a particular focus for the funding due to the politics of the day, but because of the arms-length peer assessment process of the Council, I have not had to worry about whether my project has aligned politically with the government of the day. Indeed, I have just received Australia Council funding through a regionally based organisation for a festival, presenting many high quality artists, demonstrating excellence in a regional setting. Previously when I have not received funding, it has been instructive to ask for feedback from the Council and it has been helpful to learn the strengths and weaknesses of my application, with which I usually concur, and it feels like an open process. It has been that I have been unsuccessful on one occasion but successful on the next. But with the NPEA assessment process as I understand it will operate, it makes me concerned that even making this submission that is critical of the program could potentially jeopardise my chances of future federal funding. I could be wrong, and maybe the culture within the Australia Council is much different to my perception, but I have never felt bias from the process, but I am concerned how the NPEA will operate.

One reason for this concern is that Minister Brandis’ examples of excellence seem to be narrowly focused within the broad range of artistic experiences. It seems ironic that many of the major organisations rely on very high levels of funding but have much smaller attendance statistics than other less funded organisations/activities/genres, yet the rhetoric around the NPEA is that excellence is connected to large audience demand. The statistics which have been shown in various media outlets, suggests that bang for buck is definitely much better for the small to medium organisations/artists. The success of Hobart’s MONA and the connected festivals MONA FOMA and Dark MOFO are fantastic examples that diversity of artistic offering can be of massive appeal and have a statewide impact.

I do lean a particular way with my politics, but I don’t try to make art that is anti-government or divisive. My belief is that art is intrinsic to the human experience and that it comes from our desire to belong, be understood, be loved - art in all its forms offers different methods of expressing and sharing our thoughts in ways that words cannot. Good art brings people together, but I feel it should pose questions and encourage new understandings. But I fear that the Budget decisions are creating unnecessary divisions within the artistic community, pitting the individuals/small/medium organisations against the major organisations and letting them fight it out to the detriment of social cohesion and equity. Support for the arts, and especially more, fringe, alternative, non-mainstreeam arts, does not have to mean supporting a dissenting, anti-government voice - most of the artists I know, are happy to be able to do what they do, get a few dollars for their work and be able to connect with people in meaningful ways. The dissent comes when there is the perception of imposition of inequitable conditions or suppression of freedom of expression.

I am a woodwind instrumentalist - saxes, clarinets, flutes - performing primarily in the areas of jazz, improvised and new music (the last meaning contemporary art music of a composed nature). I am a composer/bandleader, having released over a dozen of my own CDs and a DVD, as well as contributing to many other projects, including Gotye, , , Australian Art Orchestra and performing with international artists including Nigel Kennedy who is one of classical music’s biggest names. I have run the Festival of Slow Music in Ballarat for the past three years, presenting a program dedicated to excellence with local artists as well as the likes of Paul Grabowsky, Harry Angus (Cat Empire), Satu Vanska (Australian Chamber Orchestra) and Jim Moginie (). I teach shakuhachi, Japanese bamboo flute at Melbourne University, teaching traditional Japanese music. I have been an assessor for Arts Victoria and I am currently on the Ballarat Live Music Advisory Committee. Recently I spent a few years doing sculpture as well, presenting work in Europe and being picked up by a commercial gallery in Melbourne. I am almost 45 years old and I started playing music when I was about 7. I have had good success with funding (including the last round of Australia Council) and it has been of great assistance. I am well respected by my peers and I have presented my work at a high level across Australia, Europe, USA. But my income is not secure, and I rely on my wife’s support for our families welfare. I am committed to excellence of artistic experience and I am fortunate to know and work with many like- minded individuals and organisations, large, medium and small. For instance, I am working currently on the next festival which is partnering with the City of Ballarat, Museum Victoria, Museum of Australian Democracy at Eureka, Art Gallery of Ballarat and includes support from Australia Council/Federal Government, Creative Victoria and others.

I am not a major name, but I am effective and I have spent a lot of my own money in building various projects because of a belief in what art has to offer - but I’m not doing it on a whim - the list of names and organisations I have just written are not insignificant. I feel I am just one example of the many artists I know that operate similarly to me in between the different levels, but which are all part of what drives the larger picture. And apparently arts is about 7% of GDP - that’s not an insignificant part of the economy to be pulling apart!

I hope this submission is of some assistance for the inquiry in providing a personal viewpoint, yet one that does have broad experience. I am happy to be contacted if required.

Sincerely

Adam Simmons 17 July 2015