‘Yet to receive a cent’: Creative Australia hasn’t paid out sacked Venice artist

The row over Australia’s representatives to the Venice Biennale may be headed to court, with Creative Australia yet to pay an initial fee to the artistic team they appointed then sacked a week later.

Western Sydney artist Khaled Sabsabi and curator Michael Dagostino were entitled to receive 90 per cent of the artist’s fee of $100,000 and the curator’s fee of $50,000, in line with the contract terms the pair signed on February 6.

Artist Khaled Sabsabi (left); Creative Australia chair Robert Morgan and CEO Adrian Collette (on right).Credit: James Brickwood, Alex Ellinghausen

Such a payment is due on signing, this masthead understands, and there had been no further meetings called to discuss settlement.

The financial obligation of the federal arts agency to Sabsabi and Dagostino was raised on Wednesday in the first meeting of the Creative Australia board since its members unanimously agreed to rescind the pair’s contract four weeks ago.

The pair were dumped following questions raised on February 13 in parliament about a 2006 work made by Sabsabi featuring footage of the September 11 attacks titled Thank You Very Much.

The agency said it had been unaware of the work until that day, and subsequently announced a probe into its selection processes amid resignations and protests.

Creative Australia’s chief executive Adrian Collette told Senate estimates in late February that the agency recognised its contractual obligations.

“We will discuss that with Khaled Sabsabi and Michael Dagostino and arrive at an agreement. We absolutely acknowledge that we have financial obligations to the artist and curator.”

But two sources close to Sabsabi and Dagostino said they had yet to “receive a cent”.

“They wrote to Creative Australia to request if payment would be made within the 30-day period, and to date Creative Australia has not responded on that point,” said one source familiar with the legalities.

“The creative team has asked for a meeting with the board of Creative Australia and, consequently, their lawyers to resolve the matter amicably, and have been told Creative Australia does not want to meet.

“Their lawyers sent a legalistic and brutal letter asking for receipts on an item-by-item basis to justify any payment that might be forthcoming.

“With the current leadership in Creative Australia, this looks to be heading for the courts.”

Creative Australia said the board was open to meeting the artistic team, and had not refused any approach to meet. Chief executive Adrian Collette had reiterated the agency’s intentions to honour its obligations under the contract terms. All correspondence between lawyers had been polite and in good faith, and intended to arrive an amicable solution.

Also on the board’s agenda was a probe Creative Australia called into the independent selection process for Venice. Terms of reference have yet to be released or the review’s leader announced.

Curator Michael Dagostino (left) and artist Khaled Sabsabi.Credit: Steven Siewert

Curators and artists have called for an independent review with input from the visual arts sector.

Juliana Engberg, curator of the Australian Pavilion and ancillary sites for Venice in 2007 and 2019, said she feared an inconclusive outcome and the “great loss of faith between Creative Australia and the visual arts and broader arts community”.

“I fear an outcome that will prepare the way for a new government to dismantle the highly valued independence that underpins the ethos of Creative Australia,” she said.

“I fear that any artist, writer, musician, dancer, filmmaker, art worker will be penalised for showing courage, opinion, and independence of thought in an environment that now flinches at the normal activities of civic engagement that underpins democracy and freedom of expression.”

Engberg said the position of the agency’s chief executive and chair were untenable.

“They have lost the faith of their constituency. Their appearance at the Senate estimates did nothing to assuage the feeling that the public has not been given a full and transparent account of the Venice Biennale selection process, the subsequent rescinding of a decision, which sounds very much like a ‘captain’s call’.”

Get the day’s breaking news, entertainment ideas and a long read to enjoy. Sign up to receive our Evening Edition newsletter here.