Regional Arts Victoria director Esther Anatolitis cautioned against calling this a win. "This is a new culture of government arts funding," she said, still only available to organisations, not individual artists, with expanded access for those in regional areas.

The Victorian senator's actions are unlikely to make life any less precarious for many small to medium arts organisations – some of which have been on the brink of collapse after Brandis' plan was unveiled in May.

"It won't be enough to restore full funding and independence to Australian arts," Greens arts spokesman Adam Bandt said. "A cut by any other name hurts just as much."

Renaming the NPEA 'Catalyst' (no, not the ABC TV science show) means little or nothing to the arts community. Perhaps the word's definition – "A substance that increases the rate of a chemical reaction without itself undergoing any permanent chemical change," according to the Oxford Dictionary – sheds some light on the government's intentions.

This is little more than a rebranding – sure, with more inclusive language to reassure the arts community. But when put side by side, there is little material difference between Brandis' NPEA draft guidelines and the Catalyst – Australian Arts and Culture Fund guidelines released by Fifield's office yesterday. (The sections on what each program would fund are almost identical).