Hugh Linehan: When ‘money for nothing’ for artists is not what it seems

Hell hath no fury like a social media reaction to an “offensive” online headline. So when an article appeared last week in this newspaper’s business section on the Government’s planned Basic Income for the Arts pilot scheme, it wasn’t surprising that the headline (“Money for nothing? Ireland’s first basic income scheme on the way”), sparked an angry response. “What an absolutely hideous headline,” wrote one critic. “Perhaps if artists were more frequently compensated accordingly for their work then this wouldn’t be necessary. The idea of ‘money for nothing’ is just insane.”

Well, not quite. Universal basic income (UBI), the idea from which the Government’s proposed scheme sprang, does indeed envisage “money for nothing” – that’s the whole point. By decoupling income from paid work (or from the requirement to be seen to be seeking paid work), UBI proposes a radical reshaping of the way in which we currently value different forms of human activity. That’s why it appeals (albeit in different ways) to both right-wing libertarians and left-wing progressives. In both cases, the “universal” bit of UBI is crucial; everyone receives the payment, regardless of wealth, status or other factors, and everyone is free to earn additional income should they wish or be able to do so.

UBI implies a complete reworking of the systems of taxation, social welfare and state expenditure which have grown up over more than a century, so it’s not surprising no country has introduced it at a national level, although limited pilots have been run in a few places. For a pilot to deliver meaningful results, it should ideally take place across an entire community – a mid-sized Irish town, say. Everyone from the supermarket owner to the local stoner would be eligible. It would be a fascinating social, economic and behavioural experiment.

Lagging behind

But that’s not what’s happening here. What the Government calls its Basic Income for the Arts pilot scheme is quite a different beast, essentially an extension of the financial supports the State already provides for the making of art via the Arts Council, Aosdána, artists’ tax exemptions and other measures. If this sounds like a generous addition to the already abundant largesse heaped by the State on its creative artists, then you haven’t paid attention to the research which shows how badly we lag behind the EU average in this area.

Electric Picnic 2022 line-up: Dermot Kennedy, Tame Impala and Arctic Monkeys to headline

---

Fake news from Ukraine: 7 steps to identify misinformation and disinformation

---

‘I was prowling around my flat:’ George MacKay on becoming a wolf

---

Sean Baker: ‘Suitcase pimps live off female talent in the adult film world’

---

On Thursday, Minister for Arts Catherine Martin published a report on a public consultation she had held in January on the pilot scheme. Over 1,260 responses were received from the public, artists and people working in the arts and culture sector with, not surprisingly, a generally favourable response to the proposal.

On the basis of figures announced by the Department of Arts (a budget of €25 million per year, with about 2,000 eligible recipients), last week’s very measured Irish Times article quite reasonably estimated an income of about €1,041 per artist per month, or €260 per week, would be paid. This figure has caused some understandable dismay, since the Arts and Culture Recovery Task Force convened by the Government during the pandemic had recommended a higher rate of about €10.50 an hour, covering an average working week of about 33.1 hours and giving a basic income of about €348 a week, or about €1,400 a month. The Irish Times’ lower estimate has been queried by sources in the department, but it’s not clear how the gap between the two might be bridged, except perhaps by tightening the criteria for eligibility and therefore reducing the number of participants.

Eligibility threshold

All should become clearer in the near future, when Martin announces details of the scheme. It appears there will be an eligibility threshold which applicants will need to meet by proving that they are full-time creative or interpretive artists in areas including visual arts, theatre, literature, music, dance, opera, film, circus and architecture. Then a “non-competitive, randomised selection process” will determine who the successful applicants are. While the scheme won’t be means-tested, there may be a ceiling on the amount of money a person can earn while claiming the income

Two years of emergency pandemic supports have introduced more people to some of the ideas underpinning the basic income movement, but many remain suspicious of anything that smacks of that “Money for nothing?” headline (which was changed some hours after publication). There is an unhappy history in this country of so-called “pilot” schemes being used as short-term sticking plasters to avoid facing long-term challenges. And for decades the dole and assorted community employment schemes functioned as an unofficial and sometimes technically illegal support for artists, musicians and performers who were supposedly looking for “gainful employment”. Far better to strip away that pretence and try giving artists the dignity and breathing space they need and deserve. That would be money for something.