Memorandum submitted by BECTU
1. BECTU is the trade union which organises
stage, front-of-house, technical and administrative workers in
UK theatre. Our members, who include staff, freelance and casual
workers, operate throughout the theatre sector, including the
national houses, regional theatre and the West End.
2. Our overwhelming current concern, in
the light of the recent DCMS spending settlement, is with the
level and consistency of public financial support for British
theatre and with its consequential implications for the labour
force.
3. The theatre sector as a whole—including
both subsidised and commercial theatre—is increasingly recognised
as having a significant economic impact. The recent study by Dominic
Shellard commissioned by the Arts Council of England (ACE) and
other bodies calculated that the sector is worth £2.6 billion
annually (excluding, for example, touring theatre companies).
This takes into account both direct and indirect contributions
to the economy, including the multiplier effect of theatre spending
and the additional spending of theatre audiences. The report points
out that this very significant level of economic activity is against
a background of a minimal amount of public subsidy: £100
million in England, £12.8 million in Scotland, £6.4
million in Wales and £2.1 million in Northern Ireland. On
this account, the approximately 540 theatres in the UK make a
very significant contribution to the economy—one which places
the level of public subsidy into its proper perspective.
4. It is to the credit of the Labour Government
that the policy of deep cuts in arts funding implemented by the
previous Conservative administration was reversed. In particular,
the settlement for the three years from 2003-04, which provided
an additional £100 million per year for the arts and specifically
an additional £25 million per year for theatre, was widely
welcomed throughout the theatre sector.
5. At the same time as this spending settlement
was announced (July 2000), ACE published its National Policy for
Theatre in England and instigated a Theatre Review proves to oversee
the application of the additional public funding from its then
existing base. The purpose of the Review therefore provided a
means of tracking the impact of the additional public funding
for theatre and of the state of English subsidised theatre. The
initial Review, together with research commissioned by ACE from
MORI on this whole process, has provided the following findings:
— The previous period of underfunding
was accompanied by declining standards, lower productivity and
falling audiences.
— The new funding, together with the
new national policy, has had a significant and invigorating influence
on the theatre sector.
— There are more and better employment
opportunities; theatres can increasingly plan ahead and think
strategically; and, perhaps most importantly, the quality of work
in theatre in England has improved.
6. The conclusion we draw is that the increased
public funding has produced clearly beneficial results; that these
results are disproportionate to the relatively limited amount
of public money involved; and that financial stability—at
least in terms of the three year settlement—has been clearly
preferable to the previous period of stop-start, year on year
uncertainty about public funding.
7. It is precisely because of this beneficial
impact of previous government policy in this area that we are
all the more concerned about the recent settlement announcement
by the DCMS for the years 2005-06 to 2007-08. By freezing the
funding allocation at its 2005 level until 2008, the settlement
will be worth—on the Treasury's own inflation estimates—£10
million less in 2006-07 and £20 million less in 2007-08.
While it might have been unreasonably optimistic to hope for a
further significant increase along the lines of the previous settlement,
we believe a settlement at least matching inflation would have
been a reasonable expectation. Instead the theatre sector is faced
with a cut of £30 million in real terms.
8. This is, in our view, regrettable not
only because of the reduced funding in itself but also because
it represents a return to the stop start financial uncertainty
which was so harmful to British theatre in the previous period.
Instead of following a stable and continuing strategy, many theatres
could now be faced with a return to the era of uncertainty and
cuts—especially in the light of additional questions about
the future amount of lottery funding.
9. As a trade union with long experience
of the theatre sector we are only too aware of the likely consequences
for the theatre workforce. Even after the recent generous funding
settlement, much theatre work continues to be characterised by
unacceptable levels of casual employment, low pay, lack of access
to training and a poor record on equal opportunities. This represents
the "silent subsidy" provided to the theatre industry
by workers whose commitment to the sector is far from adequately
recognised and rewarded.
10. Progress has begun to be made in some
of these areas in the recent period. BECTU has been at the forefront
of efforts to tackle low pay and to improve access to training
through the union's TOSCA project, which aims to promote the learning
of key and basic skills by theatre workers through the training
of Union Learning Representatives.
11. BECTU has also been keen to address
the serious under representation of black and ethnic minority
workers within the theatre workforce. The ACE's Eclipse Report
(2002) indicated, for example, that only 4% of staff in regional
theatres were from ethnic minority backgrounds. The union has
therefore been in discussion with ACE about the implementation
of a new diversity policy, including ethnic monitoring of staff
and a target employment levels set in proportion to the local
population. The union brings particular expertise and commitment
in this area following our successful and TUC award-winning Move
On Up initiative promoting increased ethnic minority employment
opportunities in film and television.
12. The sobering fact is that the prospects
for progress in all of these areas rest on the assumption of a
stable if not increasing labour force in theatre. This in turn
is linked to stable and adequate public funding. We therefore
believe the recently announced settlement—with its failure
to match inflation—is a potentially significant threat to
the future development of subsidised theatre. We would hope even
now that the lessons of the recent past could lead to a reconsideration
of the settlement and—for a relatively small amount of extra
public funding—to an increased award which could allow the
sector to build on the initiatives made possible by the previous
settlement.
12 January 2005
| 
