‘A real shock': Alarm as NSW arts agency slashed by 25 per cent
The state's arts agency is facing the loss of one quarter of its workforce under a major restructure that signals the end to a decade-long government-led building boom of new museums, galleries and theatres in NSW and a renewed focus on audiences.
The cutbacks to Create NSW were announced to staff on Monday with the Minns government promising to reinvest million dollar savings into new frontline programs to fill auditoriums and halls already built.
The axe is to fall on 25 per cent of the agency's 91 staff, affecting managers and executive directors of the agency's infrastructure division responsible for planning and delivering major projects under the previous Coalition government including the Walsh Bay Arts Precinct, Sydney Opera House Concert Hall and Sydney Modern. The agency's executive is expected to be cut by at least two-thirds, under a spill of positions.
NSW Coalition, the Greens, and the peak body representing visual artists have criticised the cutbacks, and its impact on the delivery of grants sustaining the sector.
But Arts Minister John Graham said the arts and culture sector was grappling with 'extraordinary pressures post COVID' and 'enormously increased costs, pressures from shifting audience trends and changing media market'.
'We're refocusing Create NSW. It will be focused on supporting the people in the arts, culture and creative industries – the people creating great work and working with the sector to develop new audiences,' he said in a statement.
'The former government made some great investments in infrastructure. Our focus is now filling those great buildings that is why our investment focuses on people – the artists and audiences – to make the most of the great infrastructure. Any money saved in the restructure will be put directly back into the sector.'
Penelope Benton, executive director of the National Association of Visual Arts said the restructure, and the departure of many experienced staff, including a significant reduction in First Nations-identified roles, had come as a real shock.
'These roles have been central to delivering on policy commitments, building trust, and ensuring meaningful support for artists and organisations across NSW. There is particular concern about the future of the Arts and Cultural Funding Program, and how it will be supported within the new structure. At this stage, it is unclear where responsibility for arts funding will sit, and whether there will be sufficient staff or expertise to deliver it effectively.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
3 hours ago
- Perth Now
Port Adelaide probe club great in antisemitism furore
Port Adelaide are investigating board member and premiership captain Warren Tredrea after he was slammed for allegedly promoting antisemitic theories on social media. Tredrea will remain on the club's AFL board while it performs a 'formal governance review' of the 46-year-old. Port's move comes after The Jewish Council of Australia objected to an Instagram post from Tredrea related to comments about Israel from a guest on the retired footballer's podcast. "(The council) is deeply disturbed by the amplification of far-right antisemitic conspiracy theories in this Instagram post and podcast episode," executive officer Max Kaiser said in a statement. Port chairman David Koch said the club maintained "comprehensive governance standards". "Directors and officials of the club are entitled to their personal views, however there are concerns that recent content published is in breach of these standards," Koch said in a statement. "The club is committed to upholding the professional standards our members, partners and the community expect and deserve." Tredrea is revered and considered among Port's greatest AFL players. He is a four-time All Australian and captained the club to their only premiership in 2004. After a decorated 255-game playing career between 1997 and 2010, Tredrea moved into the media in Adelaide. Tredrea joined Channel Nine in 2013. He was dismissed in 2021 for refusing the company's COVID vaccine edict and lost a court appeal seeking $6 million in lost wages.
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
NATO bowed to Trump's defence demands. It'll cost them 19,800 fighter jets
Governments around the world agreeing to the change will need to make some tough decisions in the context of other budget pressures, says Euan Graham, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. 'How the government cuts the pie of the tax take is going to require hard, hard decisions,' Graham says. The UK, for example, which has agreed to hit the 5 per cent target by 2035, is slashing foreign aid to pay for its additional $155 billion defence spending bill. 'That is not an announcement that I am happy to make,' UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said of the change. 'However, the realities of our dangerous new era mean that the defence and national security of our country must always come first.' Other countries lifting their spending to meet the new target include Germany, France and Italy. They will need to boost their annual spending by $220 billion, $153 billion and $135 billion, respectively. Earlier this month, Rutte warned NATO members that if they didn't pledge to up defence spending to 5 per cent, 'you'd better learn to speak Russian'. But Spain, which spent just 1.3 per cent of its GDP on defence last year, refused the increase. The extra spending would force the country to 'drastically raise taxes on the middle class, or severely cut the size of our welfare state,' Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said. The NATO agreement could see Australia dragged further into the debate over defence spending by bolstering the Trump White House's argument that US allies can spend more on defence. US Defence Secretary Peter Hegseth has told Australia to increase defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP, which the Albanese has pushed back against in favour of its plan to lift expenditure to 2.3 per cent. The Coalition went to the election promising to lift defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP by 2035-36, which the Parliamentary Budget Office said this week would cost $156 billion and add $24 billion in interest costs. If Australia's defence spending was lifted to 5 per cent in the same time frame, the cost to the federal budget would be $261 billion and have an additional $40 billion in interest. Rabobank senior strategist Ben Picton said the debate was about 'guns or butter'. 'The Australian government is faced with choices between increasing the defence budget to expand capability or increasing spending on social programs like the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), aged care, and childcare,' Picton said in a research note this week. 'Clearly, Australia is currently choosing 'butter' but retains substantial headroom in the budget to increase spending by comparison to peer economies.' Loading The Australian government spent about $56 billion on defence in 2024-25 – more than the $44 billion it spent on the NDIS. Eminent economist Saul Eslake believes that no government will cut spending on social services to beef up defence. 'You'd make a lot of people pissed off and it's hard to do, which to me means you've got to look to the revenue side [to raise more money],' Eslake says. But Graham says Australians would understand a cut to services – like the NDIS – if the government was 'honest about the nature of the threat' posed to national security.
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
NATO bowed to Trump's defence demands. It'll cost them 19,800 fighter jets
Governments around the world agreeing to the change will need to make some tough decisions in the context of other budget pressures, says Euan Graham, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. 'How the government cuts the pie of the tax take is going to require hard, hard decisions,' Graham says. The UK, for example, which has agreed to hit the 5 per cent target by 2035, is slashing foreign aid to pay for its additional $155 billion defence spending bill. 'That is not an announcement that I am happy to make,' UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said of the change. 'However, the realities of our dangerous new era mean that the defence and national security of our country must always come first.' Other countries lifting their spending to meet the new target include Germany, France and Italy. They will need to boost their annual spending by $220 billion, $153 billion and $135 billion, respectively. Earlier this month, Rutte warned NATO members that if they didn't pledge to up defence spending to 5 per cent, 'you'd better learn to speak Russian'. But Spain, which spent just 1.3 per cent of its GDP on defence last year, refused the increase. The extra spending would force the country to 'drastically raise taxes on the middle class, or severely cut the size of our welfare state,' Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said. The NATO agreement could see Australia dragged further into the debate over defence spending by bolstering the Trump White House's argument that US allies can spend more on defence. US Defence Secretary Peter Hegseth has told Australia to increase defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP, which the Albanese has pushed back against in favour of its plan to lift expenditure to 2.3 per cent. The Coalition went to the election promising to lift defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP by 2035-36, which the Parliamentary Budget Office said this week would cost $156 billion and add $24 billion in interest costs. If Australia's defence spending was lifted to 5 per cent in the same time frame, the cost to the federal budget would be $261 billion and have an additional $40 billion in interest. Rabobank senior strategist Ben Picton said the debate was about 'guns or butter'. 'The Australian government is faced with choices between increasing the defence budget to expand capability or increasing spending on social programs like the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), aged care, and childcare,' Picton said in a research note this week. 'Clearly, Australia is currently choosing 'butter' but retains substantial headroom in the budget to increase spending by comparison to peer economies.' Loading The Australian government spent about $56 billion on defence in 2024-25 – more than the $44 billion it spent on the NDIS. Eminent economist Saul Eslake believes that no government will cut spending on social services to beef up defence. 'You'd make a lot of people pissed off and it's hard to do, which to me means you've got to look to the revenue side [to raise more money],' Eslake says. But Graham says Australians would understand a cut to services – like the NDIS – if the government was 'honest about the nature of the threat' posed to national security.
