Written evidence submitted by Equity (arts
115)
INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS
1. Equity is the trade union representing
36,500 actors, performers and other creative professionals working
in the UK. Our members work across the arts sectors and the creative
industries including in drama, comedy and entertainment productions,
opera, musical theatre and dance. The composition of the membership
is approximately equal between the sexes.
2. The question of the nature and adequacy
of public support for the arts is a core concern for our members.
It is a crucial issue, not only for those individuals currently
employed in theatre and arts organisations (whether subsidised
or in the commercial sector), but also for many of our members
working in television, film or radio, who will often work across
all of these media.
3. This submission will respond to the key
points outlined by the Committee in its terms of reference, but
will focus on those areas that are particularly relevant to our
experience. We would also welcome the opportunity to provide additional
oral evidence to the Committee in due course. As the representative
organisation of actors, singers, dancers, stage managers, creative
contributors and other performers working in the UK we believe
we could provide an essential perspective on the issues covered
by this inquiry.
4. We welcome the timing of this Inquiry,
but regret that its findings will not be ready in time to better
inform the Comprehensive Spending Review. Equity has been very
concerned that no discussions have as yet taken place between
DCMS or the Treasury and trade unions in the creative sector concerning
proposals in the Comprehensive Spending Review. We are also concerned
that no impact assessment has been carried out in accordance with
the new Equality Act legislation.
The impact recent, and future, spending cuts from
central and local Government will have on the arts and heritage
at a national and local level
5. This inquiry comes at a time when funding
for arts and culture are under considerable threat. We are aware
that DCMS funding may be reduced by up to 30% and that organisations
including Arts Council England have been asked to undertake work
to model the effects of substantial cuts to their budgets. All
Arts Council England Regularly Funded Organisations have already
received a year-in cut of 0.5%. In monetary terms this represents
a reduction in income for 2010 of £142,185 for the Royal
Opera House and £104,022 for the Southbank Centre.
6. The impact of these cuts will also have
significant consequences for smaller theatre companies, which
operate on much smaller margins and could be devastating for our
female members who are already disadvantaged with regard to employment
opportunities, despite the success of largely female-led productions
such as "Mama Mia" and "Calendar Girls". Small
scale and fringe theatre, which are characterised by low pay,
currently represent the main employment opportunities for women.[62]
7. The continuing popularity of the arts
has enabled the sector to grow and succeed, despite the challenges
of the recession. In 2008-09 there was an increase in attendance
at Regularly Funded Organisations of 17% and a 9.2% increase in
the percentage of RFOs rated "strong" or "outstanding"
in artistic quality.[63]
Given this success and the potential for further growth, the cuts
foreseen in the Comprehensive Spending Review would appear to
run contrary to the intention of growing the UK's economy by enabling
sectors such as the creative industries and tourism to expand
and provide employment.
8. In his speech at the Serpentine Gallery
on 12 August the Prime Minister pledged to make Britain one of
the top five tourist destinations in the world. The arts and the
UK's cultural heritage will obviously be a vital component of
a successful tourism strategy. Research by the Nation Brands Index
for Visit Britain has found that the UK is ranked 4th out of 50
countries in terms of having an exciting, contemporary culture
in terms of music, art, films and literature. Further research
by Visit Britain demonstrates that culture and heritage are "the
main motivators for visiting Britain for a holiday/short break".
Visit Britain also estimates that holidaymakers in the UK spend
£3 billion, representing 60% of their total spending, on
culture and heritage activities.[64]
9. Business leaders also agree that investment
in culture and the arts should be sustained. In 2009 HSBC asked
500 entrepreneurs what they thought business in Britain should
focus on in the years ahead. World class creative industries were
the most important priority at 56.5% ahead of the 46.2% emphasising
the need for a top class education and training system.[65]
NESTA has calculated that with Government support, a 4% annual
growth rate can be achieved in the coming years by the creative
industries, double the rate of the rest of the economy. This growth
would boost GVA to £85 billion from £57 billion and
create 185,000 new jobs. By 2013, the creative industries are
expected to employ 1.3 million people, which is likely to be more
than the financial sector.[66]
10. We also have significant concerns about
the impact of cuts to arts funding at the local level. Only 15%
of theatres in the UK are subsidised by the Arts Councils, most
receive financial support from their local authorities. Local
authorities have flexibility over discretionary budgets and so
the impact on arts and cultural expenditure will vary from council
to council. If protection is afforded to areas such as education
and health when local authorities come to implement budget cuts,
this could mean that local arts and culture budgets will face
more severe reductions.
11. A statutory duty to fund the arts, as
is the case in Wales, could deliver substantial benefits for local
authorities. NALGAO (National Association of Local Government
Arts Officers) estimates that for every £1 being spent on
arts services a return of £1.67 is realised in additional
funding from other organisations and services.[67]
Local communities derive enormous benefits from spending on the
arts and culture. Investment in cultural activities can also drive
regeneration and community cohesion. Public approval for spending
on the arts is high, as borne out by recent survey evidence from
the Greater London Authority. GLA survey results show that 71%
of respondents feel that it is important that "taxpayer's
money continues to be invested in London's culture during difficult
economic times" compared to just 16% who disagree.[68]
12. Any significant cuts to public funding
for the arts inevitably places the sustainability of many organisations
at risk. This will impact on the employment, training and development
opportunities available to actors, performers and creative professionals,
whose contribution to the arts drives the success of the UK's
cultural offer nationally and locally. The talent nurtured in
our theatres and music venues win record numbers of Oscars, Tonys
and Grammies, demonstrating that investment in talent delivers
an international competitive advantage for the UK and should be
sustained.
What arts organisations can do to work more closely
together in order to reduce duplication of effort and to make
economies of scale
13. Our members strongly believe that action
is necessary to reduce excessive administrative costs in arts
organisations. For some time, our members have reported that organisations
have been investing significant amounts in modernising their management,
marketing and administrative structures and that this has led
to a decrease in funds available for production. We are concerned
that increasing overheads have put the core business of theatres
at risk. For example, in spite of significant investment in its
building, an entirely new management team and a reduced number
of productions, the Northcott in Exeter fell into administration
this year.
14. There are also discrepancies between
full time employment opportunities available to performers compared
to those available for support staff. Many theatres are now employing
increasing numbers of staff not directly related to performance,
such as press and publicity, community outreach and school liaison
officers. The justification for this spending is that theatres
need to reach out to new audiences.[69]
While Equity supports this aspiration, unfortunately there is
no evidence that such schemes have proven successful and that
audiences are becoming more diverse or increasing. Moreover, it
appears illogical to invest more resources in reaching out to
audiences if this compromises the amount of funding available
to produce work on the stage for audiences to watch.
15. Organisations should be required to
share data about the proportion of their budget that is spent
on the production of work and specifically on creative workers.
This could assist in ensuring best practice across the arts. If
funding allocations are to be cut, the Arts Councils should also
set maximum levels for the proportion of funds spent on administration
and should ensure that there is a fair balance between the employment
opportunities and remuneration available for creative workers
and support and administrative staff.
16. Our members have also identified a significant
increase in co-productions. While this model can make sense financially,
in some cases it can lead to a decrease in employment opportunities
and fees for actors, and other creative professionals including
designers and directors, which in turn has a negative impact on
the pool of experienced creative talent. Co-productions can also
limit the opportunities for genuine ensemble work which is a valued
form of theatre many members believe is under-represented in the
current modes of production.
17. Equity has argued for some time that
the Arts Councils and local authorities should work together as
much as possible to provide a coordinated approach to arts funding.
While Equity does not have direct experience of managing these
relationships, a number of our members who work as artistic directors
report that better communication and joint working can be achieved
through regular meetings which include all funding parties.
What level of public subsidy for the arts and
heritage is necessary and sustainable
18. Currently public funding makes up just
over half (53%) of the income received by the arts sector. 8%
of public money is spent by local authorities. The private sector
accounts for 15% and box office and other earned income constitute
a further third of funds.[70]
This mixed economy of funding has evolved over time and is effective.
In the last decade there has been an unprecedented level of funding
made available to the arts which has delivered a range of critically
and commercially successful work.
19. The current framework of public support
for the arts enables practitioners to take risks and make long
term investments in creativity. Funded theatre is able to experiment
and produce new and exciting work, precisely because it does not
have to rely completely on ticket sales at the box office in the
same way as the commercial sector. This ability to take risks
makes funded theatre more dynamic and creative, and more able
to provide opportunities for new talent and new writing.
20. The organisation Arts and Business agrees
with this assessment. In their recently published report Arts
Funding in a Cooler Climate A&B state that "a tripartite
system that has evolved so organically and which appears to grow
so interdependently would be put at risk of serious damage by
any attempt to recast it more radically, including the withdrawal
of large amounts of subsidy".[71]
21. As with many other sectors of the creative
industries, the arts are not commercially viable without the support
provided by public subsidy. However, the return generated by this
investment is far in excess of the subsidy awarded and adds value
to the UK economy through VAT receipts, the creation of intellectual
property and the development of creative talent. According to
Arts Council England in 2004 the public investment of £121.3
million for theatre generated in the region of £2.6 billion,
split between the West End (£1.5 billion) and the rest of
the country (£1.1 billion). Whilst this is a mixture of subsidised
and commercial activity, commercial theatre would readily admit
its inability to thrive without the subsidised sector.
22. There are, however, elements within
Government arts funding policy that could be rebalanced. Public
subsidy for the arts must prioritise the need to develop more
original production, create employment for professional performers
and focus less on administration. In line with good practice in
other areas, and in order to create sustainable employment in
the arts sector, funding bodies should insist that organisations
in receipt of subsidy pay at least industry standard wages and
fees to performers and other creative workers.
Whether the current system, and structure, of
funding distribution is the right one
23. We continue to support the arms length
principle, the use of peer review in the sector and believe that
micro-management of arts organisations is not desirable. However,
we do believe that funding bodies should have a duty to hold accurate
and reliable information on pay, how much work is being produced
and how public money is being used across the arts sector.
24. Initial findings from Equity's 2010
survey of its members show that over 85% earned less than £20,000
from their work in the entertainment industry in the last 12 months.
17% of members have had to turn down work in subsidised repertory
theatre in the last 12 months because the pay on offer was too
low. In commercial theatre and independent theatre the figures
for turning down work rise to 19% and 37%. As low pay for performers
is endemic in the arts sector, there is clearly a role for the
Arts Councils and other funding bodies in proactively promoting
the right to be paid properly, whether this is adhering to National
Minimum Wage legislation or industry agreed rates.
What impact recent changes to the distribution
of National Lottery funds will have on arts and heritage organisations
Whether the policy guidelines for National Lottery
funding need to be reviewed
25. Equity has responded to the consultation
by the Secretary of State on the Draft Legislative Order to enact
a change to the shares going to the National Lottery good causes.
Many of our members work in organisations which depend on Lottery
originated funding which is distributed by bodies including the
Arts Councils, the UK Film Council and Creative Scotland. We welcome
the draft Order and its objective of increasing the share of funds
apportioned for the arts, heritage and sport from 16.6% to 18%
each by 1 April 2011. We also welcome the further proposed increase
in the shares for the arts, heritage and sport to 20% from 1 April
2012.
26. The Olympics currently account for £2.2
billion of National Lottery funds, which is approximately 20%
of the money that has been made available for good causes between
2005 and 2012. During this period the arts and heritage stand
to lose £322.4 million. For this reason we would like to
see an even greater proportion of Lottery funding made available
for arts, sport and heritage in the future.
27. Some significant achievements have been
made possible by the Lottery funding provided to the arts. It
is therefore unfortunate that the additional £50 million
that will be generated as a result of the proposed changes to
the Lottery shares is likely to be more than offset by cuts to
the arts budget resulting from the Comprehensive Spending Review
and the demands of the Olympics.
The impact of recent changes to DCMS arm's-length
bodies—in particular the abolition of the UK Film Council
and the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council
28. Since 2000 the UK Film Council has championed
film production in the UK and has made a vital contribution to
both our economy and international cultural reputation. The success
of British film since the Film Council's creation is clear. The
core UK film industry contributed over £4.5 billion to UK
GDP in 2009 and over £1.2 billion to the Exchequer gross
of tax relief and other fiscal support, from a turnover of £8.6
billion. At the same time UK film exports were 92% higher than
in 2001, totalling £1.3 billion. In 2009 UK films and talent
scooped 36 major film awards, 17% of the total available.[72]
29. While we appreciate the assurances made
by the Government that tax relief and Lottery funding for UK film
will continue, we are concerned that the decision to abolish UKFC
has been taken without prior consultation with interests in the
sector. There continues to be a need for a dedicated body that
can advocate for, and champion British film and film talent, as
well as engage with stakeholders such as studios, distributors
and trade unions.
Whether businesses and philanthropists can play
a long-term role in funding arts at a national and local level
Whether there need to be more Government incentives
to encourage private donations
30. While Equity acknowledges that philanthropy
makes a significant and positive contribution to the arts economy,
generating £363 million a year for the sector,[73]
we are concerned that private investment should not displace public
subsidy. Inducements to encourage private donations and philanthropy
should be welcomed as this will enable organisations to top up
their funding, but as stated above, we continue to support the
existing mixed economy of funding which has proved to be stable
and successful.
31. Total private investment in the arts
sector fell by 7% for the whole of the UK last year and by 8%
in London.[74]
Given that falls in investment were experienced in all three sources
of private sector support, namely business sponsorship, individual
donors and trusts and foundations and that the organisation Arts
and Business expects this trend to continue for at least two years,
the case for supporting and maintaining public subsidy is all
the more compelling.
32. We do not believe it is realistic for
the UK to replicate the US model of private giving to the arts,
where 95%[75]
of funding is generated from private sector sources. The experience
of the US suggests that a reliance on private donations is likely
to concentrate funding towards established organisations and could
dissuade artists from taking risks or developing new productions
and new writing.
33. There is also a risk that substituting
private donations for public subsidy will create a funding divide
between London and regionally based organisations. Regional repertory
theatres are an important pillar of UK theatre and have supported
numerous successful and innovative new works that have transferred
to theatres in London and beyond.
Other areas of interest that are raised during
the course of its inquiry
34. Equity continues to be concerned that due
regard for equal opportunities, particularly with regard to gender
balance and portrayal are long over-due in the arts sector and
is campaigning vigorously for change. Research undertaken for
the International Federation of Actors,[76]
of which Equity is a member, found that women in the arts consistently
earn less than men across all age categories and that age and
gender are a disadvantage when it comes to job opportunities,
a disadvantage further compounded by being from an ethnic minority.
Best practice for tackling this problem exists in other European
countries such as Norway,[77]
where organisations in receipt of government funding are required
to do a yearly audit on gender balance. It is vital that employers
and arts funding bodies are made aware of their obligations under
the Equality Act 2010.
September 2010
62 Sphinx Theatre Women in Theatre Survey 2006. Back
63
Source: Arts Council England Annual Report 2010. Back
64
Culture and Heritage Topic Profile, data from the International
Passenger Survey, available from: http://www.visitbritain.org/Images/Culture%20%26%20Heritage%20Topic%20Profile%20Full_tcm139-184566.pdf Back
65
The Future of Business, The Changing Face of Business in 21st
Century Britain, available from: http://www.100thoughts.hsbc.co.uk/downloads/HSBC-future-of-business-report.pdf Back
66
Figures available from: http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/creative_industries/startups_creative/starter_for_6_
startups/assets/features/uk_creative_industry_to_drive_significant_growth_i Back
67
See: http://www.nalgao.org/e107_images/custom/spendreport08.pdf Back
68
Pg 60, Cultural Metropolis, available from: http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/04%20Culture%20Strategy
%20final1.pdf Back
69
Arts Council England reported in its 2009 Theatre Assessment that
"national trend data available for the five years of this
Assessment reveals a static picture for attendances and audience
profiles". Back
70
Source: Arts & Business. Back
71
Report available from: http://www.artsandbusiness.org.uk/media%20library/Files/communications/ArtsFundingina
CoolerClimateFINAL.pdf Back
72
Source: UK Film Council. Back
73
Source: Arts & Business. Back
74
Ibid. Back
75
Ibid. Back
76
Age, Gender and Performer Employment in Europe, 2008: http://www.fia-actors.com/uploads/ENGLISH.pdf Back
77
The Norwegian Gender Equality Act 2005 states that "Enterprises
that are subject to a statutory duty to prepare an annual report
shall in the said report give an account of the actual state of
affairs as regards gender equality in the enterprise. An account
shall also be given of measures that have been implemented and
measures that are planned to be implemented in order to promote
gender equality and to prevent differential treatment in contravention
of this Act." Back
| 
