Senate Inquiry into Proposed Arts Changes.

[Gary Harding]

Warooa, In all fairness at the present time I think that it is too early to make any call on Sen Mitch Fifield.

He says that he "is still being briefed." Fair enough.

I know that Bush Poetry had a very strong ally in George Brandis. Therefore it is not inconceivable that many of the ideas I sent along might have actually been acted upon.

When one looks at the mass of vested interests being supported by the Australia Council and they are being revealed now in their submissions, it is a politically determined person who would have the courage to stand up to them. Take them head on and say no longer will Arts be run by a bunch of cronies (The Club) who obviously like to play-the-man. Under NPEA, administrative power will be returned to the Australian people through the Arts Minister of whatever political persuasion that may be at the time.

There is no "cut" to arts funding as such, just a transfer of funds and associated Power away from The Club which is why they are screaming. The Australia Council has built up a numerically large power base by handing out lots of small hobby-grants which Sen Brandis suggested have little or no value.

In fact the number and titles of programs and grants now being revealed seems endless. The present government through NPEA etc aims to do away with handing out money to left-handed puppeteers collectives and other endless worthy cultural causes and employ the money more effectively (and accountably).

How dare they!

At present the Free Verse lobby, and they are also numerically very strong because after all anyone can write poetry if there are no rules, control every cent in poetry and treat Balladry with contempt.

I would like to see Bush Poetry at least have a voice rather than no voice.

So will Sen Fifield be a tough guy and take the baton from George and run with it or will he be a weak appeaser and back down.. or try some dumb compromise suggested to him by his flunkies?

It is still a case of wait and see.

What sort of man is he? He does have a Bachelor of Arts degree so in that regard at least he is no dummy... but is he man enough to take this bullying, self-interested and pathetic bunch of arties on? We will have to wait and see.

That is all just my opinion though ... for what it is worth.

[Gary Harding]

Interesting times.
The following on-line article from the Daily Review starts to give a picture of Sen Fifield.

http://dailyreview.com.au/fifield-says- ... dges/30971

One needs to look very closely at what Mitch is (quoted as) saying. From the article he apparently says a lot of nice-sounding words and phrases.
"Taking into account concerns, stated his desire to be more consultative, acknowledged the legitimate worries held by artists, acknowledges the poor timing of the program's introduction... blah, blah."
Setting aside that waffle, apparently when asked directly whether he was going to abandon NPEA (i.e. take back control of his own Arts Ministry) he states "My starting point is to endeavour to make the scheme work...."

Pretty unequivocal I would have thought. Great!! good on ya Mitch.

He then defends the transfer of $102m away from the Australia Council Club back to the people (accountable government).
The article insists on referring to the Australia Council as an "arms-length" body.
Yeah, who actually says it is arms-length!!?? Who?

You really have to think when reading this sort of stuff as to what is Fact ..and what is Opinion or Interpretation (neither of which are arms length).

Take the last couple of lines as an illustration. The article suggests "the message and style of delivery will certainly keep the public onside for the time being." Again, says who? For a start the public at large would have no idea any of this is going on. This Arts power struggle.

Quite a neat speech really though. Good on him so far.

It looks to me like Mitch is someone who would rather have the Arts Ministry running Arts and not a bunch of cronies who answer to themselves.
Sen Brandis QC may wear a suit and not a bush hat, but I would not like to have him as an opponent. Same with Mitch I am thinking... he has a sense of humour!

"I'd never accuse the opposition of not doing things in a partisan fashion," he said. "But just because a committee of inquiry may have been born in partisanship and may be conducted in partisanship doesn't mean that the submissions and evidence of witnesses isn't worth looking at."
So much for the Senate Inquiry! haha

Mitch Fifield is off to a great start at least. In due course we may find out where he stands on Traditional/Bush Poetry. He certainly LOOKS closer to The Man From Ironbark or even a rugby field than wierd and sometimes vulgar, so-called "poems".

Won't be long before the arties wake up that they have been fooled, and start playing the man again... trying to shout him down... I bet. It is their style after all.

Looking good so far... go for it Mitch.

[Gary Harding]

Well tomorrow sees the last session of the (one-sided) Arts (so-called) Inquiry.

It is in Sydney... so if you feel inspired you still have time to rush down to see it. The power stuggle. Traditional or any Poetry was not specifically on the Agenda this time.

Don't you just love "democratic" non-partisan inquiries that show, without exception, only one side of the case. That is Australia, the country we are (told to be) proud of..

Yes, I know it is unfortunate that all good things must come to an end, and no doubt there is more than one tear being shed out there in ABPA-land.

On reflection, it has been a smart move to shift George Brandis away from Arts. In doing so, those at the Inquiry no longer have a target for their venom, which has obviously left them floundering. Mitch Fifield still appears to be a sympathetic nice bloke (temporarily) and "I am still learning about this Ministry" stuff ... still "being briefed". So he is no target... oh dear!

That is very disarming when the strategy was to fire up The Mob with hatred and speeches aimed at "getting George".. and now he is not there.. Ooops! It has pulled their teeth.

Anyway there was a fantastic verbal brawl at 10.30am.

Sen Ian Macdonald (Qld) who is a very very, perceptive and terrific guy asked a pointed question and had the nerve to insist on an answer from a witness. This resulted in much ducking and weaving because the answer, if it was to be forthcoming, would have demolished much of the witness' credibility. Glenn stepped in to defend the witness, the witness got upset, Ian rightly pressed home his attack as a good lawyer would in sensing a tactical advantage, Sen Lazarus waded in like a rugby player, and.... what a brawl. A halt was called to proceedings. "Time Out" called Referee Glenn...

THAT is why I listened to the session beginning...

THAT is hilarious entertainment and good return for my taxpayer dollar. Where the Inquiry and the Submissions capably demonstrate how my taxpayer dollars are being massively wasted, this brawl was a huge laugh and worth every cent.

Anyway, I could only hack so much of the wingeing, self-interested, simpering tripe where every second word was that ultimate buzz-word "community".

Winners : Sen Ian Macdonald. Showed up as a great people's representative who you could tell just got fed up with the artie lot of them (again) and had to be dragged off them (again) by Glenn. Heel Fido.

Losers : Arties. All sounding the same with whining simpering voices and not once expressing any concern for what the taxpayer might (or mostly might not) gain from funding. Self, first and last. The ultimate torture would be to be forced to listen to the whole session.. you would happily pull every wasted taxpayer cent from all of them.

Neutral : Glenn Lazarus as chairman. A nice guy.. but nice guys neither win nor lose. So...neutral.

Power to Bush Poetry!!!!

[Gary Harding]

Further to the above post of today just posted, for those interested in the relationship of Traditional Poetry to the proposed government Arts changes whereby among other things money is to be transferred from the Australia Council back to The Ministry, my submission (No. 1219) published today discusses some aspects.

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus ... ubmissions

Quick way : Select 500 entries on "page size", then go to page 3.
Check the box opposite submission no 1219, then go down to the bottom of the page and click on Download Selected.

[Gary Harding]

Last day in Sydney.

Absolutely hilarious.

Clearly the best was kept until last.

Ian Macdonald in real form, asks the "Australia Council for the Arts "..what would happen if the Minister gives them a direction to support say Rural activities and people in the Arts in country areas or Arts fields that "produce" real and long lasting outcomes rather than short term entertainment... sculpture over dance say... or some other general policy direction. What would they do ???

They could not give an answer.

In at least three years and indeed in living memory they said, no Minister had ever given a direction to the Australia Council. They had been given totally free reign to do whatever.... or in other words THEY determine Arts expenditure.. and not The Minister and the people of Australia!! The cabin boy was on the bridge while the captain was in his cabin sleeping.

Panic! Someone volunteers a copy of the relevant law Act and to the hushed audience, the relevant passage is pored over and then read out. Heads scratched. Is there a lawyer in the house? (Yes, actually Sen Macdonald, but he is enjoying himself so much at the discomfort of the arties he is hardly volunteering).

"Well it would be a matter that would require discussion between us and the Minister!!" the Australia Council proclaimed. A Eureka moment...

Which is one of those stupid statements, where everyone nods their heads in wise agreement, to something meaningless and nice sounding... if everyone agrees and nods, we have reached a solution! Straight out of Yes Minister.

Talk about Amateur. I have never laughed so much since I saw the Marx Brothers and The Contract scene. The party of the first part. "Itsa no good, tear it off".
Yes.. incompetence, self-interest, stupidity, and above all selfishness... but humour? absolutely!

Arts journo's will never report the truth because they are beholden to these artie people, but there was other hilarious stuff when Sen Macdonald tried to find out who these "peers" were and who appointed them. Why.. committees and boards with managers, and directors and staff they said.... yes but who appoints these people to appoint experts. Are not the experts themselves the best ones to decide who experts should be...?

Anyway... I got full value for my taxpayer dollar.

Arts is partly about Entertainment, and if today was any example I must confess I got full value.

Bring on the next Inquiry.

[Gary Harding]

Finally to close....another Senate Inquiry incident highlighted the nature of The Australia Council for the Arts, the people that control our (bush) poetry money, on behalf of the taxpayer.

Apparently someone had been very critical of the Australia Council and called them all sorts of unpleasant names that suggested incompetence or worse... the adjectives escape me for now... but they were asked for comment on that negative assessment of them.

Now I suggest that a professional response would be to firstly acknowledge that person's right to hold that view. They can say that they would naturally disagree and can stand confidently on their record as has been reinforced by the positive comments made in overwhelming numbers of supportive submissions. A self-effacing response that suggests Managers whom one can trust to be placed in charge of disbursing vast public funds in an even-handed manner free of undue influence. The question could have allowed them to trot out all sorts of endorsements from respected philanthropists etc... told the world how great they were etc. An opportunity.

But did they do that??? Did they place themselves above such supposed unfair criticism?

Not a bit.

Instead they actually climbed down and went on the personal attack and suggested that the critic was a person who was sour-grapes, had a grudge against them, been possibly knocked back for some grant etc. They brawled petulantly, showed a small-mindedness and sought to shoot the messenger.

Unbeliveable. Incredible. I could not believe what I was hearing. What sort of salary are these fellows on?? And they control Arts as a statutory authority and I am paying their wages. More fool me. I hate nastiness.

This significant exchange was very revealing. People can draw their own conclusions and I trust will do so.

Again Sen Macdonald had some fun by asking.. "Look I know you would never ever be influenced by this, and I am not at all suggesting it in my wildest fancy, but have your staff ever been approached privately, lobbied, say at a bbq or even down at the pub seeking favourable treatment for someone, had a good word put in etc...."

A careful lawyer's question.

Answer YES and you will be savaged for details and be in the headlines tomorrow. The press and public love a sniff of scandal.

Answer NO and it is pretty clear that a reasonable person might well think you are tinkering with the truth. (Of course that sort of thing must happen.. it is the nature of the beast )

To try on the highly evasive "not to my knowledge ..." answer (as was done) is potentially catastrophic, as a lawyer will say ... "well so it might have happened and if it did it was never reported back to you... are your staff of so-called experts and peers under any direct instructions to report to you any improper approaches, and where is the written evidence of it, say in Engagement Contracts?? If not, why not? "

Well these Australia Council for the Arts guys hold themselves up as Arm's Length.. use the word "Australia" in their title.... pure white.... perfect... beyond reproach. Everyone parrots it ad nauseum.

I think Sen Macdonald very effectively challenged and demolished that premise and made it clear in a few carefully worded questions WHY the government was introducing NPEA and pulling big public money away from these illustrious gentlemen and their distasteful private Club of syncophants, mutual back-scratchers and sea of vested interests that exists to the detriment of the taxpaying public and worst of all.. us bush poets!

[manfredvijars]

What was that old adage, "Those who can, do - those who can't, talk about it!"

Thanks for keeping us up to speed Gary, but what an utter bucket-load of shyte ...

Bunch of wankers, the lot-of-em ...

[Gary Harding]

Thanks for your support Manfred!! and I know this intense subject is not everyone's cup of tea, but yes it is an important fight that needs to be fought for Traditional/Bush poetry, and now is the rare opportunity to do so.

There is nothing in it for me personally... no money... which is the opposite to ALL the other folk who submitted. I might also have an agenda, but it is not self-interest.

Yes, they are all a big pain in the proverbial... that's for sure.! haha.

I see the Artie fashion is to wear a scarf around your neck, flung in careless abandon over one's shoulder! .. and I thought it was mismatching thongs! ah well.

If you go to :

https://www.facebook.com/freethearts2015

They love featuring themselves as heroes.. showing little video clips and clapping their hands and flattering each other. They frequently spoke over the top of Senators and talked them down which was so rude...and showed no respect.

THEY were the most important people after all... they were RIGHT.

One of them complained that arties were Doing It Tough, no money to dance across a stage.. shocking!! Senator Macdonald (Qld) said, "yes there are a lot of farmers too that know all about doing it tough..." The point went over all their self-important heads.

I reviewed submissions with a mate and some of the grants were unbelievable!! "How could someone be given money for that....". hahaha very revealing!

A good laugh.
Anyway it is outcomes for Bush Poetry that I am really chasing.. the rest is just verbiage and easily forgotten.

Just a couple of significant ones though :

1. When terrific poets like Shelly and Zondrae and Maureen for example look to publish a modest book of their work, then I want that work to somehow be subsidised.
If they can hand over grants of $40k for stuff that nobody understands and $80k for infamous naughty poems, then I am out to shame them into doing it if it cannot be done out of any respect for Australian literary heritage or plain good ballad poetry.

2. I would like kids to hear The Man From Snowy River at least once in their lives and school is the best place. If free verse is on the HSC curriculum, they push their own silly vacuous barrow there, then Henry Lawson will now be on the curriculum too to balance things.

.. anyway I understand from sources that my Submission has had a very high and positive impact and that it negates a large proportion, if not all of the other Inquiry Submissions (1300 to date published). Pretty powerful stuff!

...so something will come out of it for us... eventually. I am sure of it.

Thanks once again, cheers, Gary

[Neville Briggs]

talked them down which was so rude...and showed no respect.

You mean they called the Senators "a bunch of wankers" or "all a big pain the proverbial".

I suppose an arty scarf flung over the neck is not so bad, would keep the sun off your neck, perhaps an arty Akubra hat would keep the sun off your face as well.

[Gary Harding]

THE SENATE INQUIRY OUTCOME ...

1. Before the Senate Inquiry, all those who benefitted from taxpayer money through The Australia Council for the Arts, including so-called "poets", existed in the shaddowy Land of Anonymity. Who were they?
It was all kept quietly under wraps (the "status quo") and an ignorant public is a happy public after all. By calling this Senate Inquiry they have obligingly revealed themselves individually through their own submissions. They have obligingly laid themselves bare and consequently open to critical examination. Great! All the vested interests, including arts journos.. amazing.

The contempt with which supposedly brother poets (free verse kind) hold balladry also came out in the open on day one... and prior to my submission being published too! That shows the agenda of those people controlling poetry funding and equally explains why Lawson and Paterson and our balladry is actively suppressed. It also shows their junk poetry up for what it is. If it didn't do that, why bother to suppress balladry.

A government who felt so inclined could wade through these submissions in depth, and look at what is being gained by the taxpayer.... could be a bit confronting and embarrassing.

Wouldn't we all like our Hobbies or Causes publicly funded. The majority of these people are merely persuing their arts-related fun hobbies to no particular public benefit. (which I believe was Sen Brandis' conclusion also)

2. Ahead of the Senate Committee's report, a minimally and cleverly adjusted NPEA (National Program for Excellence in the Arts) has been put forward. Also a new Minister has been appointed.
Previously the Arts campaign was a disgraceful play-the-man, bullying, shout-down thing. A "Get Brandis" plan. So in order to defuse that, they merely changed Minister. Gottcha. The second part of the campaign was directed at this hated object "NPEA". So, what do you do? Why.. simply change the name of course!! To "Catalyst"... no more NPEA, which is what they wanted. Right out of Yes Minister.

All of this has been couched in concilliatory terms by a smiling Mitch Fifield... an avalanche of buzz-words and warm meaningless phrases fired right back at them, and even a requested but pointless consultative meeting was held. Other similar ploys were invoked liked "giving back" money to the Australia Council.... haha check out the fine print on that one.

This financial (and other) sleight of hand seems to have fooled most except a few academics who suddenly find themselves alone in their objections to being out-manoeuvred. Their campaign has run out of puff.. you can only keep the rage for so long...

Tactics have won the day for the government.. and in this case, for us too I believe.

3. Further defying belief, and showing the Arties up for the greedy self-centred people that they are, they are shamefully trying to jump on the fabulous COMPO gravy train. Free taxpayer money. They have been a bit inconvenienced by this proposed change, oh dear... have been subjected to uncertainty (heaven forbid!!) and they reckon that has to be worth a few bob... money found perhaps from increased taxation (on others who actually work) increased national debt for our kids to pay off or taken from farmers perhaps. Compo! at my expense. Bunch of totally selfish parasites who wouldn't have a clue.

4. The Australia Council for the Arts performed miserably. When asked if they would follow a direction from the Minister, they dodged the question. THEY reckon that they have no boss but themselves and have a big bankroll to distribute. No prizes for guessing how much money supports bush poetry! A real Club.

What is said about absolute power...?

What emerges for Real Poetry... that is traditional Australian poetry/balladry.. Lawson, Paterson and Dennis.. remains to be seen. I feel very confident something will now emerge and the beneficiaries will be the people of Australia!!! ... who pay the bill.

Poetry will be Reformed, which is a trendy euphamism for .. CHANGE! Hooray!

We win! A victory.

Henry, Banjo and Clarrie Dennis have been aggressively stood up for.... and us devoted Traditional/Bush poets with them. Thanks to those who kindly supported me.

Arties lose.