Memorandum submitted by the Group of Small
Local Authority Museums (GoSLAM)
1. Funding: the operational budgets of GoSLAM
museums make it difficult for us to offer our residents the museum
services that they should be able to expect. Grant aid is not
a complete solution to our limited resources, but it can be very
valuable and enable service improvements that would not otherwise
occur.
1.1 HLF grants have become harder to obtain,
but they remain the obvious first choice for major capital projects
and we are therefore concerned at rumours that HLF funding might
be significantly affected by the 2012 Olympics as this would have
a major impact upon our ability to offer our residents the services
that are available to those who live in areas that receive direct
government support through the Renaissance programme.
1.2 Small grant schemes have also been very
important to our members in the past, but although both EmmS and
MLA offer some support these are a pale shadow of the grant schemes
formerly offered by the area museum councils. HLF grants now tend
to require too much supporting information to be cost effective
for small grants.
2. Acquisition and disposal policies have
not yet proved to be a major issue for any GoSLAM museums, but
we are very concerned about recent developments at Bury, which
sets a dangerous example for other hard pressed local authorities.
We are especially worried that a weak response from funding bodies
such as the HLF may encourage other Councils to sell of their
heritage for a short term funding fix.
3. The importance of access to heritage
and the position of heritage as a cultural asset in the community
is less clearly recognised than we would like.
3.1 The budgetary pressure on local authorities
continues to increase and leaves our non statutory services particularly
vulnerable. This vulnerability is enhanced by the lack of any
convincing national advocacy for the value of our unique and special
collections as selling points for tourism and urban regeneration.
3.2 The planning system funds the creation
of archaeological archives, but ignores the problem of their subsequent
retention for the public benefit. We cannot continue to take on
the responsibility for such material while our resources decrease.
3.3 CPA is not yet playing its part here:
Accreditation, which requires a balanced approach to the work
of a museum service, is not yet an indicator for district councils
and there is no other indicator that places a clear value on heritage
rather than general outreach and community engagement work.
4. Access to professionals with conservation
skills: GoSLAM museums rarely have conservators as part of their
staff and would normally purchase conservation advice and support
on a contract basis. Our difficulties in this area are to do with
funding, of which we have insufficient to test the capacity of
the market to provide such skills.
5. The remit and effectiveness of DCMS,
MLA and other relevant organisations representing heritage interests
is a cause for concern and many of our members feel that since
Renaissance such bodies have sometimes forgotten the smaller local
authority services that are not in the hubs.
5.1 MLA nationally has done much valuable
work; getting the Audit Commission to recognise Accreditation
in any form is a very positive step, for example. We are disappointed
however that it has not addressed the inequality at the heart
of itsr remit, ie that the material heritage, which we preserve,
lacks any of the statutory support that compels local authorities
to make some provision for libraries and archives. We recognise
that this battle is unlikely to be won, but we would like MLA
to speak more loudly about this problem.
5.2 MLA's regional bodies are well respected
and their development officers are among our most valued sources
of advice and support. The growth of sub-regional development
officer posts should therefore be a reason for celebration, but
it is becoming clear that small local authority museums will not
always be within their remit.
5.3 Subject Specialist Networks have been
of considerable value to some GoSLAM museums, although again our
modest staff capacity limits our opportunities to engage with
these useful networks.
In addition, GoSLAM would also like to make the following
points:
6. The value Renaissance of funding to non-hub
services is gradually increasing: hub officers attendance at GoSLAM
meetings and our members involvement in Specialist Panels are
a positive step as is the improved training offer.
6.1 The impact of Renaissance on public service
delivery in some GoSLAM museums has however been described as
"small to non-existent" and is as yet no substitute
(at least in our heartland, the East Midlands) for the direct
support that was once available from the area museum councils.
6.2 The complexity of the Renaissance Business
Planning does not facilitate our involvement in the Renaissance
project and can thwart the best efforts of Renaissance officers
to include GoSLAM members in forthcoming projects.
6.3 Regional training has improved substantially,
but there are still many important sessions outside any one region
and Renaissance does not yet have the capacity to bring the lessons
back to small museums whose limited resources prevent their involvement
in many training opportunities.
7. The role of EmmS is still evolving as
the different functions of MLA East Midlands Renaissance East
Midlands develop. EmmS is at present reviewing its role in this
context, but it is currently an important training provider and
a useful source of very small grants.
8. The role of Trusts: whether Councils
are investigating trusts in order to improve management, or to
reduce costs, there is no doubt that the process uses up a substantial
amount of valuable time and has a demoralising and unsettling
effect upon most staff. Very few GoSLAM museums are large enough
(even if linked with other partners) for the process to make any
sense at all, but this information is not clearly available, and
thus a number of GoSLAM museums have wasted a substantial amount
of time demonstrating what should have been obvious: that they
are far to small to operate independently. GoSLAM believes in
any event that every area should have access to a core of statutory
museum services provided by local authorities.
December 2006
|
