Hands tied on hate

Creative Australia has no power to investigate complaints that the artists and organisations it funds have engaged in antisemitism, racism or hate speech, and no policy setting out what to do when such a complaint is made, the Royal Commission heard last Friday.

Tim Blackwell, executive director of corporate resources and acting CEO of the federal government’s principal arts investment body, said the agency had “no ongoing monitoring or investigatory powers” and relied on law enforcement bodies such as the Australian Federal Police, ACMA and the eSafety Commissioner to determine whether conduct was unlawful before it could consider the impact on funding.

“We’re not an investigatory body. We don’t have classification and those sorts of powers,” he said, adding: “It is difficult for us to investigate with any compulsion.”

Under questioning from Counsel Assisting Zelie Heger, Blackwell agreed that none of the agency’s policies defined antisemitism, and conceded there was no codified policy setting out what should happen between a complaint being referred to police and a court reaching a determination.

“We don’t have a codified policy that sets out how we would refer something, say, to the Australian Federal Police.”

The agency’s standard funding agreement requires recipients to comply with anti-discrimination laws, and a breach can result in funding being cancelled or repaid. But Blackwell said Creative Australia interpreted that power narrowly, applying it only where a breach related to the specific funded project.

He was taken to the case of artist Matt Chun, in which a complaint was raised after funds had been provided. Blackwell said the grant, made in June 2023, was for a project unconnected with the complaint, so the agency had no power to withdraw it. A broader condition capturing an applicant’s conduct in any context would be “very, very difficult”, he said, as the agency would then be “assessing the character of a particular person, rather than the project”.