|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Articles
|
||
|
Articles |
Funding PrioritiesDateline: 11th February, 2007Local councils are currently finalising their budgets - and their council tax rates - and there are two major concerns in every council's area: by how much will the council tax go up and what will be cut? And consequent on the latter, of course: will there be job lost? For there is no doubt that there will be tax rises and there will be service cuts. The grant from central government to councils is never enough to meet growing needs. That isn't just a moan from the councils but a fact of life. The requirement to conform to equal pay legislation has hit the majority councils very hard financially and although one can argue that they should have seen it coming (and, indeed, should have done something about it years ago), it is nonetheless a major factor in this year's round of budget-setting. It is fair to say that theatres and theatre companies across the UK are bracing themselves for bad news and that those who find their themeslves with standstill funding or cut by around 2-3% will actually feel themselves quite lucky. We have already heard of possible cuts to BAC in London and the Royal and Derngate in Northampton, but similar discussions are going on in town halls all over the country. A similar process - but on a much larger scale - is going on in Whitehall as the Treasury prepares the Comprehensive Spending Review for the three years 2008 - 2011. The figures involved are quite staggering: total government spending in 2005-6 was £523bn of which £11bn (2.10%) went on recreation, culture and sport, the lowest spend, left far behind by health (£90bn), social protection other than pensions (£81bn), pensions (£65bn) and education and training (£70bn). £24bn went on personal social services and a massive £27bn (5.16%) went on debt interest alone. Total government spending in the current year is expected to be over £550bn. £170bn went on all aspects of social services (including pensions), outstripping defence spending by £138bn. Although on a smaller scale, local authority spending follows a similar pattern. In 2003 Arts Council England's report The Arts in England, found that, during that year:
The most quoted statistic from that Report was: 79% of people agreed that 'Arts and cultural projects should receive public funding'. Put together the amount of money spent on the arts (the lowest of all government and local authority spending) and the number of people who watch or are involved in theatre (25%), then there must surely be an argument for protecting the money given to the arts and culture. With only 2.10% being spent on recreation, culture and sport, the proportion going to the arts must surely be no more than 1% (although the public figures do not specify this), so any cuts on a national or local level aare bound to have a disproportionate effect. And then there is the fact that - unlike spending on some other aspects of life - local spending on the arts generates income for the local economy. If we look at Wandsworth, the borough in which BAC is located, we find that:
BAC, of course, has a national reputation and a national audience, but research shows that every subsidised venue generates income for its local economy, so cutting grant aid has a knock-on damaging effect on the local area, as well as the inevitable cultural damage. For most local authorities the saving that can come from cutting arts provision will be in the order of thousands of pounds or, at the most, low hundreds of thousands, hardly significant savings when set against the revenue generation for the area arts venues - and particularly theatres - provide - and compared to even the smallest authority's budget. The only justification for such cuts would be to be seen to be sharing the pain around equally. And unfortunately too many councils think that way. Regional Arts Council offices are not as flexible as they used to be - they can't be, because of the government's three year funding regime - and now it looks likea fair amount of Lottery money is to be diverted towards paying for the massive increase in spending on the 2012 Olympics. Already theatres and theatre companies are flying by the seat of their pants, with costs rising all the time. Look forward (what a choice of words!) to leaner times come April and the beginning of the financial year.
|
|
|
|