The Powerhouse Museum's decision to axe its controversial $2.6 million artistic consultants' program has sparked intense debate and scrutiny. This move comes amidst a backdrop of internal tension, public criticism, and calls for transparency and accountability. The program, which engaged nine creatives as artistic associates, has been accused of 'outsourcing by stealth' and has raised concerns about the museum's spending and the role of public servants.
Among those let go are renowned chef Kylie Kwong, artist Agatha Gothe-Snape, photographer Zan Wimberley, and former book publisher Julie Gibbs. The museum's decision to terminate these roles has ignited a heated discussion about the value and impact of external consultants in the arts sector.
The Public Service Association (PSA) has been at the forefront of this debate, arguing that the associates were performing duties that should be carried out by in-house public servants. The union's concerns were further fueled by the revelation that the associates had access to Powerhouse facilities and worked closely with museum staff, blurring the lines between internal and external roles.
The parliamentary inquiry into arts funding recommended that the museum restore and retain specialized in-house curatorial expertise, ensuring that external roles supplement rather than replace core curatorial functions. This recommendation highlights the need for transparency and accountability in the museum's operations.
The financial implications of the program are staggering. In its first year, the four artistic associates cost the museum $142,000, but at its peak, the museum spent a staggering $871,226 on six associates. This significant increase in spending has raised eyebrows and led to questions about the museum's financial management.
The museum's refusal to disclose the total payments to Kwong, Gothe-Snape, and Wimberley under freedom-of-information laws has only added fuel to the fire. The NSW Audit Office has previously criticized spending on consultants, and the museum's decision to withhold information has been met with criticism from the public and the Greens MP, Cate Faehrmann.
The conflict-of-interest documents released reveal that chief executive Lisa Havilah had prior and current professional relationships with some of the associates, raising questions about potential biases and transparency. The museum's response, however, emphasizes the strategic intentions of the program and denies any connection to the parliamentary inquiry.
The end of the program has been met with mixed reactions. While the union welcomes the decision, it emphasizes the need for funding to be redirected towards permanent, professional museum roles. The debate surrounding the Powerhouse Museum's consultants program highlights the complex interplay between external expertise, public trust, and the need for transparency in the arts sector.
