The Claim
“Ended the Get Reading! program.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
The claim that the Coalition Government "ended the Get Reading! program" requires careful verification. Research indicates this likely refers to the Book Council of Australia (BCA), which was announced by Prime Minister Tony Abbott in December 2014 but then defunded and scrapped before it ever launched in December 2015 [1][2].
The BCA was announced with $6 million in funding over three years, intended to "celebrate good reading and good writing" and address challenges facing the Australian book industry [3]. However, in the 2015-16 Mid Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO), the government announced the BCA's cessation and defunding [1][2].
Additionally, the Australia Council for the Arts - which oversees literature funding - suffered $105 million in funding cuts announced in the 2015-16 federal budget [4][5]. These cuts forced the Australia Council to cancel several programs including:
- ArtStart program
- Creative Communities Partnerships Initiative
- Artists in Residence program
- Six-year funding for organisations program
- June grant round [6]
The "Get Reading!" program name appears to be a conflation or misremembering of either the Book Council of Australia initiative or specific Australia Council literature programs that were cut as part of these broader funding reductions.
Missing Context
The claim omits several critical pieces of context:
The Book Council was created, then cancelled before launch: The BCA was announced in December 2014 but scrapped in December 2015 - it never actually operated as a functioning program [1][3]. This was not simply "ending" an existing program but rather cancelling a proposed body that was still in formation.
The funding mechanism was controversial: The BCA was originally funded by taking $6 million from the Australia Council budget - against industry wishes [2]. This became part of a broader pattern of Arts Minister George Brandis diverting Australia Council funds to create the National Program for Excellence in the Arts (NPEA), a minister-controlled fund [4][5].
The cuts were part of broader arts austerity: The literature sector cuts occurred alongside $105 million in Australia Council cuts and were part of a government-wide budget reduction effort to address deficit concerns [4][5].
Industry reaction was mixed: While some artists and writers protested the cuts (with almost 6,000 signing a petition including Thomas Keneally and J.M. Coetzee) [6], some industry figures like former Australian Publishers Association President Peter Donoghue called the BCA "a bullshit organisation of dubious 'industry policy' Kim Carr provenance" and noted the pity was "the money wasn't returned to its rightful owner, the Australia Council" [2].
Source Credibility Assessment
The original source cited is Business Insider Australia. According to AllSides media bias rating, Business Insider (known as "Insider") is rated as "Lean Left" with a bias meter value of -1.46 [7]. AllSides has medium confidence in this rating, based on independent review and blind surveys conducted in February 2022 and March 2024 [7].
Business Insider is a U.S.-based business and technology news website that covers Australian politics from an international perspective. While generally factual in reporting, the "mind-blowing list of programs axed" framing suggests a sensationalist approach designed to emphasize the scale of budget cuts rather than provide balanced context about budgetary necessities or alternative funding arrangements.
Labor Comparison
Did Labor do something similar?
The Book Council of Australia concept actually originated with industry groups (publishers, booksellers, agents, and authors) since 2010 and was endorsed by the Labor Party before being announced by Tony Abbott [2]. This was a bipartisan-supported concept that the Coalition both implemented and then cancelled.
On broader arts funding:
Labor's record: The Keating Labor government launched "Creative Nation" in 1994, a landmark cultural policy that significantly increased arts funding and established many of the funding mechanisms that continued through subsequent governments [8].
Historical pattern: Both major parties have adjusted arts funding based on fiscal priorities. The 2015 Australia Council cuts were significant ($105M over 4 years) but followed a pattern where arts funding is often vulnerable during budget consolidation periods under governments of both stripes.
The Literature Board: The Literature Board of the Australia Council was already discontinued in 2014 (before the Coalition's major cuts) due to broader structural changes in arts administration [2].
Balanced Perspective
The Coalition government's handling of book industry and literature funding was complex and drew mixed reactions:
Criticism of the approach:
- The Australia Council was blindsided by the $105 million cuts, with executives emailing the government demanding answers about how the reduction was calculated [4]
- The cuts forced cancellation of established programs with proven track records - the six-year funding model had shown these organizations leveraged $8 of additional income for every $1 invested by the Australia Council [6]
- The BCA's funding was diverted from the Australia Council rather than being new funding, creating tension within the arts sector [2]
Context and mitigating factors:
- The government was facing significant budget deficit pressures in 2014-2015, and arts funding was one area targeted for savings across the portfolio
- The BCA was controversial from its inception due to its funding mechanism and board appointments - Melbourne literary activist Sam Twyford-Moore organized a campaign against it signed by Nick Cave, John Coetzee, and 350 others [2]
- The government eventually partially reversed course: Communications Minister Mitch Fifield (who took over arts from Brandis) returned $32 million over four years to the Australia Council and restructured the NPEA into the Catalyst fund with a focus on smaller projects [4]
- Arts Minister Fifield promised to "consult widely with the literary community about alternative sector-led mechanisms for representation and promotion" after scrapping the BCA [2]
Key context: This is not unique to the Coalition - both major parties have restructured arts funding based on fiscal and political priorities. The Book Council concept itself had bipartisan origins, and the literature sector has long struggled with inconsistent government support regardless of which party is in power.
PARTIALLY TRUE
6.0
out of 10
The Coalition did cancel/defund the Book Council of Australia and made significant cuts to Australia Council programs affecting literature and reading initiatives ($105 million in cuts forcing cancellation of ArtStart, Creative Communities Partnerships Initiative, Artists in Residence, and other programs). However, the claim presents this as simply "ending the Get Reading! program" which oversimplifies what occurred:
- The "Get Reading!" program name appears to be a misremembering or conflation of the Book Council of Australia and related Australia Council literature programs
- The Book Council was cancelled before it ever launched (it existed only as an announcement and partial setup)
- The context of budget deficit pressures and the controversial funding mechanism (taking money from the Australia Council) is omitted
- The partial reversal ($32M returned) and restructuring is not mentioned
The factual core is accurate - the Coalition did cut programs affecting reading and literature - but the framing omits important context about the nature of these programs and the circumstances surrounding their cancellation.
Final Score
6.0
OUT OF 10
PARTIALLY TRUE
The Coalition did cancel/defund the Book Council of Australia and made significant cuts to Australia Council programs affecting literature and reading initiatives ($105 million in cuts forcing cancellation of ArtStart, Creative Communities Partnerships Initiative, Artists in Residence, and other programs). However, the claim presents this as simply "ending the Get Reading! program" which oversimplifies what occurred:
- The "Get Reading!" program name appears to be a misremembering or conflation of the Book Council of Australia and related Australia Council literature programs
- The Book Council was cancelled before it ever launched (it existed only as an announcement and partial setup)
- The context of budget deficit pressures and the controversial funding mechanism (taking money from the Australia Council) is omitted
- The partial reversal ($32M returned) and restructuring is not mentioned
The factual core is accurate - the Coalition did cut programs affecting reading and literature - but the framing omits important context about the nature of these programs and the circumstances surrounding their cancellation.
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (8)
-
1
Short shelf life: the Book Council of Australia is stuffed back on the rack
The Book Council of Australia – announced by Tony Abbott just over a year ago – was today scrapped. But we still need a body to advocate for literature and to advise government on policy settings.
The Conversation -
2
Government defunds Book Council of Australia, encourages industry-led council
Purchase a subscription to view job ads and other premium content on Books+Publishing.
Booksandpublishing Com -
3
Tony Abbott announces new literary body, the Book Council of Australia
A new body to tackle the woes of the book industry has been announced by Tony Abbott at the Prime Minister's Literary Awards. 
The Sydney Morning Herald -
4
$105m budget cut caught Australia Council by surprise, emails show
Australia's peak arts body was blindsided when the Federal Government ripped $105 million from its budget, new documents released under Freedom of Information reveal.
Abc Net -
5
Election FactCheck: did the Coalition cut $105 million from Australia Council funding?
The Conversation
Daily Bulletin -
6
Australia Council suspends, cuts programs following funding cuts
Purchase a subscription to view job ads and other premium content on Books+Publishing.
Booksandpublishing Com -
7
Business Insider Media Bias Rating
Allsides
-
8
Creative Nation: Commonwealth Cultural Policy
Efa Org
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.