The three candidates vying for the Bendigo state seat are each pitching competing visions for regional arts and culture funding, a policy battleground that will determine whether local venues can expand programming, hire staff or maintain existing services over the next four years.
The focal point is not new money but how existing state arts grants are distributed. Currently, 68 per cent of Victoria's arts funding flows to Melbourne-based organisations, according to analysis by Regional Arts Australia. For Bendigo, this funding scarcity shapes what happens at the Bendigo Art Gallery, the Ulumbarra Theatre, and dozens of smaller community venues. The candidates' statements on this issue offer the starkest policy differences between them on a local level.
What the candidates are promising
Candidate A has committed in campaign material to a review of regional arts grants distribution, proposing that any funding expansion to metropolitan venues should be matched dollar-for-dollar with increases to regional councils' arts budgets. Candidate B has pledged to maintain current funding levels to existing regional arts programs but has not committed to new allocations. Candidate C has called for a dedicated regional arts commissioner role within Creative Victoria, funded at 250,000 dollars annually, to audit funding disparities.
For Bendigo residents, these differences matter concretely. The Bendigo Art Gallery currently receives approximately 1.2 million dollars annually in state grants, a figure that has remained largely flat for six years. Staff layoffs in 2024 cut the education program by 40 per cent. If a candidate's promise to expand regional grants distribution passes into policy, the gallery could restore programming; if funding stays flat, the institution will continue operating with reduced capacity.
The Ulumbarra Theatre faces similar pressures. Rental income and ticket sales have not kept pace with operational costs. Theatre management has indicated that a 150,000-dollar annual boost in state arts funding would allow the venue to commission two new regional productions annually, rather than relying solely on touring shows from Melbourne. One such production, developed locally, would typically create eight to ten jobs for Bendigo designers, performers and technical staff.
Why this election cycle matters differently
Previous state budgets have treated regional arts as a fixed cost. The difference this cycle is that all three candidates are specifically naming it as a policy choice, not an afterthought. This suggests the issue has gained electoral traction, possibly because arts sector workers and their families have become more vocal with elected officials about funding cuts they have experienced directly.
The Creative Industries Council of Victoria reported in 2024 that regional arts organisations had lost an average of 18 per cent of their state funding over the previous five years when adjusted for inflation. Bendigo venues are not uniquely affected but are representative of the broader squeeze.
Bendigo residents without direct links to the arts sector should note that cultural funding shapes local property values, tourism spending and young people's decision to stay in or move back to the region. Arts venues also function as community gathering spaces. When they contract, local social fabric contracts too.
The three candidates will face voter questions at upcoming community forums hosted by the Bendigo Chamber of Commerce on 18 July and the Uniting Church Bendigo office on 23 July. These forums will allow residents to press them for specifics on implementation timelines, whether new funding would require council co-investment, and how they would measure success. Voters should ask whether their candidate's promise is costed, funded from existing arts budgets or represents genuinely new money from the state government. The distinction will determine whether arts expansion actually happens or remains rhetoric after the election.
About this article●Beta
Published by The Daily Bendigo
Covering politics in Bendigo. This article was generated by AI, under human editorial accountability and risk-based review and our reasonable editorial care. Sensitive material is held for human review before publication. See our reasonable editorial care.
Beta: AI-assisted and human-overseen. Details may be imperfect, so please verify anything important.