The inside story of how Australia’s moment to shine in the arts world went horribly wrong

Khaled Sabsabi and Michael Dagostino are back as Australia’s representatives to the Venice Biennale after a fraught four months in the political wilderness which tested the fortitude of both men, and caused untold reputational damage to the federal arts agency which sacked them.

According to the independent report of Blackhall & Pearl, no single individual should be blamed for the “series of missteps, assumptions and missed opportunities” that led to the board of Creative Australia’s shock dumping of the pair when the artist’s back catalogue stirred controversy in the halls of Parliament House.

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

Instead, the report draws a line between the Dural bomb hoax and the heightened sensitivities in which the board of Creative Australia operated when it capitulated to political and media pressures on February 13.

War in the Middle East was the broader context, and Creative Australia, its executive and board, should have been more alert to the geopolitical shock waves headed its way, it said.

But in refusing to apportion blame the report downplays the significance of a looming federal election, the perceived existential threat to the independence and funding of the organisation, and the principle of executive accountability.

Creative Australia’s chair Robert Morgan has retired, making way for Wesley Enoch. The agency’s experienced chief executive, Adrian Collette, has apologised and committed himself to restoring community trust, signalling he will stay for the rebuild. But few insiders believe he can survive Australia’s biggest arts scandal in more than a decade.

And then there was one

Sabsabi and Dagostino were selected for Venice 2026 after a lengthy selection process in which a panel of industry advisors helped whittle six shortlisted artistic teams to one.

Both were experienced practitioners and the pair’s project was regarded as a standout. Hopes were high for the new team after Australia’s previous representative, Archie Moore, collected the Golden Lion, the equivalent of an Olympic gold medal at the prestigious arts show.

The historic grip of major galleries over Australia’s representatives had been broken, and the newish selection process seemed to be serving Australia well.

Protesters gathered two days after senior Creative Australia executives faced a Senate estimates hearing.Credit: Kate Geraghty

On December 16 last year, Collette and Creative Australia’s head of visual arts, Mikala Tai, conferred and the pair’s selection was confirmed, the decision tightly held in the organisation for weeks for fear it would leak.

Among the select few with knowledge of the successful team, the decision was regarded as “bold” or “courageous” – Sabsabi’s Lebanese heritage and public pro-Palestinian stance connected him to the Middle East at a time when conflict in that region was emotive and polarising.

But a week before the planned February 7 announcement, police lobbed their own explosive device into this febrile mix, going public with their investigations into a caravan loaded with explosives in north-west Sydney.

The incident was quickly labelled a “terrorism threat”, although later the Federal Police would describe it as “a criminal con job”. By then, a federal election was imminent and polling showed voters were starting to turn against Labor.

Two days after the caravan discovery, Creative Australia briefed Minister for Arts Tony Burke on its upcoming announcement. Mention was made in the ministerial dispatch that Sabsabi, along with other artists, had withdrawn from the Sydney Festival in 2022 in protest after the festival accepted funding from the Israeli Embassy, “out of solidarity with the Palestinian people and the Palestinian cause”.

But the minister’s office was not alerted to historical works which would later be raised in the Murdoch press and in parliament, including You (2007), a multichannel video and sound installation featuring imagery of the late Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, in the collection of the Museum of Contemporary Art.

“That the work was seen as highly ambiguous, and already nearly 20 years old … appears to have given staff confidence that any controversy connected with the work could be managed,” the report says. A staff member later left a message with Burke’s office alerting them to the work’s existence but appears not to have followed that call up.

A ‘questionable’ matter

The board of Creative Australia was backgrounded on the winning team but played no direct role in the selection process. Members were not alerted to any potential controversies.

Days after the team’s announcement, as its sister tabloid paper defended allegations it tried to entrap a Sydney cafe in an antisemitic sting, The Australian described Sabsabi’s use of imagery of Nasrallah as “ambiguous” and “questionable”.

Collette and senior members of his team were unaware of a second sensitive work, Thank you very much (2006) featuring imagery of the 9/11 attacks and US President George W. Bush, until Senate question time two days later when the Coalition’s then-shadow arts minster Claire Chandler rose to her feet.

By all accounts, Chandler’s questions sparked panic. Soon after, around 3pm, the CEO, chair and head of public affairs held a call with Creative Australia’s external communications advisers, who concluded the negative media narrative around the artist and his prior artworks posed a significant risk to the reputation of Creative Australia if the stories continued to run.

Burke then called Adrian Collette at 3.30pm asking why he was not alerted to the contentious artwork. He later insisted he did not demand Sabsabi’s head. The report found that the minister’s statement was consistent with the information received by the panel during its review.

Collette later recalled in testimony to Senate estimates: “We anticipate always that the selection of the Venice artist will be controversial. It has been from time immemorial.

“Everyone has a view on the artist, on the art. We don’t resile from any of those decisions; we haven’t in the past. But what happened at that moment was a recognition by me and the board that this entire process was going to be mired in the worst kind of divisive debate.”

At 6.05pm an emergency meeting of the board had been convened, and it was determined to offer the artistic team the opportunity to withdraw from the project under threat of sacking. The board did not seek the advice of the head of visual arts or its head of communications, and did not allow the artist to present his case.

It was beyond the panel’s terms of reference to judge the legitimacy of the board’s decision, but it’s clear the board acted hastily without drawing breath. The board could have announced a review of the team’s selection. Instead, it brought a gun.

“Nobody except those involved can ever know how fraught and heartbreaking that meeting was,” board member and artist Lindy Lee later recalled. She resigned the next day.

Officially, the board said it acted to avoid the unacceptable risk to public support for Australia’s artistic community of a “prolonged and divisive debate”.

The panel found the board felt compelled by “a strongly negative narrative [that] was expected in the media around the artworks and the artist, and the decision to select the artist had become a matter of political debate”.

Another factor that may have been weighing on some board members was the potential for the controversy to be used as a battering ram to reduce the funding and independence of Creative Australia. With an election imminent, Creative Australia faced an existential threat from cuts, real or imagined, as conservatives made every noise they would follow the playbook of Donald Trump in stirring up the culture wars.

Notably, it is in a more benign political environment with Labor securing a thumping majority that Sabsabi and Dagostino have now been reinstated.

In any event, at 7.41pm on February 13, Collette contacted the artistic team and advised them of the board’s decision. Sabsabi and Dagostino refused to resign. Forty minutes later, after the board’s statement was prepared, Collette made three unsuccessful attempts to contact them.

Sabsabi and Dagostino later recalled being stunned by the turn of events: “The Venice Biennale is one of the biggest platforms in Australian art,” Sabsabi told this masthead. “To be selected and then have it withdrawn was devastating. It was heartbreaking and has caused ongoing anxiety. It’s had a serious impact on my career, my wellbeing and my family’s wellbeing.”

By 6pm the following day the Herald had broken the news that philanthropist Simon Mordant had resigned, along with Mikala Tai and program manager Tahmina Maskinyar. Petitions and protests followed, the outrage lasting four months until the board voted two weeks ago to rescind its decision.

Had Creative Australia been as well-prepared for the public announcement as it should have been, it is possible that its senior leadership and board may have reached a conclusion that any controversy around both works could be sensibly managed, the report concluded. The organisation was caught between its conflicting desire to do right by the artists and political realities. Ultimately, the entire mess could have been avoided if cooler heads had prevailed and due processes were followed.

Changes afoot

Former publisher Louise Adler is not the only commentator to draw parallels between the Sabsabi debacle and Antoinette Lattouf, the radio broadcaster who was last week awarded $70,000 after a Federal Court found she was unfairly sacked by the ABC for her political opinions concerning the war in Gaza.

Like Lattouf, Sabsabi’s pro-Palestinian views were well known at the time of his appointment, and complaints flooded Creative Australia as soon as the appointment was publicised, cheered on by the Murdoch media.

Holding or expressing a political opinion was held by the federal court as not a valid reason for terminating Lattouf’s employment, even at the national broadcaster.

Sabsabi and Dagostino had been selected by an open expression of interest process, by an organisation founded on the principle of artistic independence. Both stand as an abject lesson to the dangers of knee-jerk reactions to pressure tactics.

Sabsabi and Dagostino speak of a sense of renewed confidence that allows them to move forward with optimism and hope after a period of significant and collective hardship. The arts world feels vindicated by their intervention.

It’s likely there will be changes to the Venice selection process, and there is every indication that Collette, an experienced arts administrator, will seek to make things right, and then make a diplomatic exit.

“At the end of the day, Adrian became the kingmaker,” said one campaigner. “He brought the recommendation to the board. The buck stops with him.”

Mikala Tai made a rare statement via social media after a period of media silence in which she said she had come to learn why she wanted to work in the arts industry. “I have also learnt a lot about cultural leadership. That we have conferred leadership on administrators and that this is a distraction from the fact that artists remain the heart of the industry and that the moment we forget the artist, we sacrifice the industry.”

The Booklist is a weekly newsletter for book lovers from Jason Steger. Get it delivered every Friday.