Ten major acts organisations, led by the National Campaign for the
Arts, have written to culture secretary James Purnell to protest at
Arts Council England's handling of the proposed cuts. They are the NCA,
Association of British Orchestras, BECTU, Dance UK, Equity, the Independent
Theatre Council, the Musicians’ Union, the Theatres Trust, SOLT/TMA
and tyhe Writers’ Guild of Great Britain.
Dear Secretary of State,
We are writing, as representative bodies in the arts sector, to express
our grave concerns at the way Arts Council England (ACE) has handled
the announcement of its future funding proposals and to seek a meeting
with you to discuss how this situation can be avoided in future.
While we absolutely recognise the responsibility of ACE to make funding
decisions, we believe that the process they have followed for this
funding round has seriously damaged relations with the sector and
other funders, and undoes the good news achieved by the uplift in
arts spending announced in the Comprehensive Spending Review.
We understand that for the majority of arts organisations the Arts
Council’s recommendations will be of benefit, with many receiving
inflation-linked or additional increases in their funding (although
we have yet to see the proposals as a whole). In the absence of this
information and in the absence of a statement from the Arts Council
about their rationale, the cuts that are coming to light cause us
grave concern.
Neither we, nor the organisations affected, have seen any evidence
that impact assessments have been made on the region or communities
where cuts are proposed. Of particular concern is the effect on the
national performing arts infrastructure. The proposed cuts potentially
put at risk all the public investment that has been delivered to date
and wastes public resources. These decisions also affect other funders,
including and importantly local authorities. There appears not to
have been any consideration taken in regard to how withdrawal of ACE
funding might affect them.
This seems particularly key in the case of the Northcott Theatre
in Exeter, which has just re-opened having undergone a £2.1
million redevelopment, work which was part funded by Arts Council
South West with an additional grant of £100,000. Withdrawal
of funding now puts the future of the theatre at risk, and seriously
exposes the other, partner organisations.
Our impression, as representative organisations, is that the proposals
do not always appear to be based on solid, reliable evidence. For
example, one orchestra was told by its regional Arts Council that
it will no longer be considered for funding because it does not meet
the priorities for uplift in the context of the ‘national orchestra
strategy’. The organisation has repeatedly asked for a copy of
this ACE strategy, and has recently been told by the Arts Council
that it does not exist! This leads us to question what Arts Council’s
strategic overview for the arts sector might be.
A couple of examples have also come to light showing that the data
Arts Council has used to reach their recommendations about funding
were inaccurate and flawed. We fear that these may not be isolated
cases.
The timing and the lack of notice for these proposals contravene
Government’s own Compact about how public bodies should deal
with voluntary sector organisations (which many arts organisations
are). In the past, ACE has tried to ensure an adequate notice and
preparation period when taking funding decisions, and has always advised
that the sector does the same in regard to its own long term planning.
In fact the Council’s own disinvestment policy refers to timescales
of a six month notice period. It is worrying that ACE is not following
its own advice in this instance.
As organisations representing many in the sector, we would welcome
the opportunity to discuss with you how Arts Council can be held more
accountable in future, demonstrate an openness in decision making
and have a better understanding of the impact of their decisions in
regard to other funders and partner organisations. While we absolutely
support the arms length principle, we feel that this situation is
of such seriousness that it merits closer inspection.
Your Department’s own review into excellence and funding by
Sir Brian McMaster, published (last) Thursday, recommends a more practioner
centered approach and a system of peer review in future funding decisions
and we would wish to discuss with you how these recommendations might
be implemented to improve the strength of the sector as a whole, and
thus how we might avoid situations like this in future.
