Written evidence submitted by Freedom
Studios (arts 118)
SUMMARY
— Disinvestment in the arts and heritage
lead to a cultural and economic deficit position.
— Return to a historical default position.
— Creating a protected enclave for a non
reflective Leadership for the culture offer being created in UK.
— Strategic lessons learnt from Sustained
Theatre.
— Maintaining current levels of (reduced
cuts to the) investment into the arts and heritage.
— Lib-Con Government has failed to articulate
with clarity in the first instance its position on culture and
the value it places as a coalition Government on a vibrant cultural
economy.
What impact recent, and future, spending cuts
from central and local Government will have on the arts and heritage
at a national and local level
Continued cuts and disinvestment in the arts
and heritage from central and local Government will leave the
cultural offer that has been strategically created over the past
decade in this country in a deficit position (both culturally
and economically).
The pace at which these cuts are being implemented
fail to acknowledge that in the past decade arts and heritage
in this country has moved from the traditional notions of culture
(founded on the Eurocentric, white, male and fundamentally exclusionary
aesthetic canons of Western civilization) to a more diverse cultural
offer accessible by a broader constituency of UK residents and
international visitors. Critically it must be acknowledged that
the past decade has seen a small but positive step change in acknowledging
the changing demographics of our country within arts and heritage
and a relatively progressive attempt at the democratisation of
the cultural space has begun to be enabled. These shifts underpinned
by policy decisions have been created by the intellectual and
physical ownership of cultural space being enabled through subsidy
and resourcing to a broader constituency of artists and consumers
who engage in the cultural offer.
Continued cuts to arts and heritage will inevitably
force funding institutions to return back to a historical default
position that both protects and safeguards the bricks and mortar
of flagship institutions at the cost of cultural offers that exist
outside of these walls. Such a historical default position will
further create a protected enclave for a non-reflective Leadership
of the culture being created in this country as expressed by Lyn
Gardner (in Why is British theatre still in thrall to Oxbridge?)
I am reminded by the words of the Cultural commentator
and BBC broadcaster Mark Lawson who spoke enthusiastically at
the very drab conference entitled British Theatre After Multiculturalism
in June 2009 at Warwick University:
"In the last couple of years I've felt a
sense of horror... I agreed with the phrase used by a reporter
that the BBC and broadcasting in general were hideously White.
I think that it is impossible to argue with that and i feel a
personal shame about this. I try to fight it and I do what I can...
I have looked at a weeks programming on Radio 4 in which there
was no non-White contributors and I have come to the conclusion
that without monitoring, without targets it never happens. There
is a terrible tendency to return to the historical default."
What arts organisations can do to work more closely
together in order to reduce duplication of effort and to make
economies of scale
A number of key learning's were formed in Baroness
Lola Young's Whose Theatre? Report commissioned by the Arts Council
of England that addressed the sustained growth of the Black and
Minority Ethnic (BAME) theatre sector in the UK. Through Baroness
Young's findings/conclusions key strategic frameworks were proposed
to support the sustainable growth of the BAME sector. Baroness
Young's findings would lead to the creation of the BAME sector
led initiative: Sustained Theatre. Baroness Lola Youngs report
addressed the key areas of: leadership, archiving, internationalism,
digital strategies and a series of networked spaces nationally.
The Sustained Theatre process demonstrates that
artistic ambition and artistic integrity can be supported and
enabled through an agreement of core values between partner organisations
through strategically sharing resources and in turn creating best
value.
A key learning from the Sustained Theatre process
has been the acknowledgement that the need for further growth
and engagement with the cultural offer cannot be achieved by all
encompassing and unsatisfactory notions of preserving this country's
diverse cultural offer. A single industrial vision attempting
to preserve the cultural offer does not go far enough in responding
to the changing demographics of the UK. The cultural ecology has
to be unpacked and responded too with greater clarity and sensitivity.
What level of public subsidy for the arts and
heritage is necessary and sustainable
In year cuts (2010) to the Arts Council of England
have directly impacted both the organisation and those that it
seeks to fund. Proposed cuts in 2011 and 2012 will see a further
inevitable reduction and scaling back of output across the cultural
sector. Accepting the necessary cuts that continue to take place
across all Government departments both the severity and immediacy
of cost saving measures leave the work of the past decade in the
cultural sector at risk of being undone.
Maintaining the current levels of funding at
the proposed stated levels must now be the ambition of the Government
and cultural sector to safe guard the infrastructure and opportunities
that have been created to date. In doing so allowing for the planning
of growth over the next 10 years.
Whether the current system, and structure, of
funding distribution is the right one
The Arts Council of England continues to demonstrate
a historical commitment to strategically supporting the growth
of the cultural sector. ACE is both a vital and necessary agent
for the cultural sector.
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
The Lib-Con Government has failed to articulate
with clarity in the first instance its position on culture and
the value it places as a coalition Government on a vibrant cultural
economy. 15 Years of sustained investment into the ACE demonstrates
a history of positive impact and added value created through an
investment into the arts. One infers the Lib-Con Governments position
on culture as being nothing more than an adjunct to tourism. Thus
failing to acknowledge the part the arts sector plays in both
creating and reflecting the culture of this country to its citizens
and internationally.
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
Business and philanthropists should be encouraged
to play a role in funding arts at a national and local level but
not replace the investment of Government into the cultural sector.
Tax breaks should be offered by Government to
encourage investment by business and philanthropists into the
arts.
One would urge the inquiry to consider how monies
offered by business against potential tax breaks would be both
managed and apportioned across the sector.
The potential drawback that would come with
this strategy is simply the investment by business into national
flagship institutions that add the greatest value to their own
brand and resulting in the arts offers that exist outside the
walls of institutions are left in a familiar deficit position.
A balance of business and Government investment would continue
to maintain a reflective cultural ecology within the UK.
September 2010
| 
