The arts have barely been mentioned since the Federal election was called on 28 March.

However, with less than one week before polling day, one important way the arts are having an effect on the election is the correlation between cultural policy and other policy areas of the major parties.

Effectively, the 2025 Federal election has descended into a choice between having an Architect or a Patron govern the country.

The LNP has been careful not to mention the Trump administration during this campaign, but it is worth noting the Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison governments of 2013-2022 pioneered the style of executive order directives that are proving so unpopular today in the United States. In cultural policy this is known as a system of Patronage, typical of the foundations of the Liberal Party under Robert Menzies.

Examples of LNP patronage during their last term in power include establishing the National Program for Excellence in the Arts (NPEA) in 2015, by allocating more than $100 million in funding at the expense of the Australia Council. But it also includes creating the Snowy Hydro 2.0 Scheme in 2017 at a projected cost of $2.0 billion, which has since been revised to finally cost at least $12.0 billion.

Earlier this year the LNP announced a policy to make entertainment expenses for small business deductible to an annual spend of $20,000. Such a policy would be welcomed by the arts as an incredible stimulatory measure, however how long would this last should the LNP form government and the cost to the Budget prove as unsustainable as a project like Snowy Hydro 2.0?

In contrast, cultural policy of the ALP, during the Hawke-Keating governments of the 1980s and 1990s, was characterised by the Facilitator model, where conditions are created for cultural output by appropriating tax expenditures to provide tax relief or other benefits for those who give cultural support. The legacies of these ground-breaking policies are still with us today – notably the income averaging scheme for artists and the cultural gifts program for museums.

The modern ALP started to shift towards the Architect model under the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd governments of 2007-2013, particularly with the decision to prohibit the purchase of artwork investments by self-managed super funds. The super art laws were eventually modified, but are an example of policy that is aligned to broad social welfare and national cultural objectives.

In July 2024 the Creative Australia Amendment Bill became law with the aims of creating a First Nations Board and a First Nations division of Creative Australia as well as establishing Writing Australia and Music Australia.

The Creative Australia Amendment Bill was the legislative response of the ALP’s Revive policy, launched in January 2023, setting out a five-year plan to renew Australia’s arts, entertainment and cultural sector after the effects of the pandemic had subsided.

The goals of Revive are as follows:

• The core recognition of First Nations stories
• Supporting the working rights of artist and art workers
• Fair remuneration and a safe and inclusive work environment for arts workers
• Inclusion of all people residing in Australia as part of ‘Australian art’
• The opportunity for students to receive education in the arts
• A focus on creating art representative of contemporary Australia whilst simultaneously preserving and protecting heritage

In August 2023, the Albanese government announced Creative Australia, renewing the ability of the Australia Council to advise and make decisions on Australian art funding. The imperative was to restore independence to the experts in cultural policy, which had been taken away and delegated to the responsible Minister by the LNP government in 2015 with its NPEA directive.

One of the main issues with relying on the Architect model is that our social welfare and national cultural objectives are not settled nor are they likely to be anytime soon. In February, Creative Australia was put into a state of turmoil over the decision to revoke the selection of artist Khaled Sabsabi as the national representative to the Venice Biennale.

The LNP, despite being in government during the pandemic, decided that, of the two major parties in Australia, it was the one that did not need to formulate an arts policy. This has resulted in a Janus-headed attitude towards the sector in other intersecting portfolios – pro-art with taxation and anti-art in education to name two.

For the commercial art sector, the LNP is promising a continuation of the popular instant asset write-off, without modification, beyond 30 June 2025, and to make it a permanent feature of the tax system. The ALP formally abolished this tax incentive on 30 June 2025 in the Federal Budget before the election was called, and it has a history with formulating the incentive to exclude art from eligible expenditure.

When it was last in power, the LNP introduced The Job Ready Graduates (JRG) scheme, giving discounted fees to students who pursue a ‘job ready’ degree such as nursing or teaching but doubling university fees for those in the creative sector. The National Advocates for Arts Education is urging this scheme to be amended or abolished.

The ALP has proposed its Free Tafe incentive to become permanent. This allows people to enrol in short courses or certificate courses for free. The training areas can include but are not limited to accounting, horticulture, mental health and technology information. This incentive does not provide any art-specific courses. Student debts are also proposed to be cut by 20% by the ALP, to counter the JRG scheme.

Common to the Architect and Patron models is the characteristic known as ‘picking winners’ and it is not restricted to cultural policy. It has become a feature of national policy decisions in all the portfolios of government. Taxation policy in particular has devolved into a game of special interests and carveouts. The arts are collateral damage because there is no current politician from the ALP or LNP willing to publicly champion the importance of the creative industries.

Finally, in relation to the Greens Party, its cultural policy is characterised by the final of the four models, the Engineer, which is more typically found in command economies.

In February the Greens announced a refreshed arts policy:

• Introduction of a living wage for artists programme for up to 10,000 artists
• Legislation to implement a minimum payment of $250 to musicians at publicly funded events
• Artist residency programme for all public schools and libraries
• Revitalize Creative Australia and bring in new leadership
• Introduction of streaming quotas to invest 20% of Australian subscriber revenue to local content
• $2 billion investment in the sustainable future of the arts sector – support of festivals, live performance, youth arts and arts administration
• $300 million invested into an Arts Capital Works Fund