Written evidence submitted by the National
Museum of Science & Industry (NMSI) (arts 196)
NMSI supports the response submitted by the
National Museums Directors' Conference. Below are some additional
points we wish to raise in relation to NMSI specifically.
1. 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
— Government funding is of particular importance
to ensuring collections are housed and cared for appropriately.
It is a much greater challenge to secure external funding for
such work as opposed to more obviously public facing activity
such as exhibitions and public programmes. We have considerable
work still to do in upgrading the housing of our collections if
we are to provide access to the full extent of these collections.
Reductions in government funding will significantly impact on
our ability to do this.
— When seeking external private funding,
we can, at the moment, demonstrate NMSI commitment to a particular
project through capital investment. Going forwards we may not
be able to inject seed corn funding and therefore funders could
question our commitment.
— Our museums based at Bradford and York
are major contributors to the regional tourism economy. If they
are to continue to remain attractive and draw tourists to the
region, continued investment is required. Reduction in investment
from Government sources will impact on the tourism economy.
2. What arts organisations can do to work
more closely together in order to reduce duplication of effort
and to make economies of scale
— NMSI is already working with other national
museums in the area of joint procurement. It is recognised there
could be further savings if back-office functions were shared.
However, if this is to be achieved strong direction and support
would be needed from DCMS to challenge the status quo and
enable this to be achieved in practical governance terms.
3. What level of public subsidy for the arts
and heritage is necessary and sustainable
— We reiterate NMDC's point with regard
free admission. If this continues to be Government policy it must
be recognised this requires funding.
— Again, we emphasise that public subsidy
for arts and heritage has a direct impact on the tourism economy
and is necessary if museums are to remain primary tourist attractions.
4. Whether the current system, and structure,
of funding is the right one
5. What impact recent changes to the distribution
of National Lottery Funds will have on arts and heritage organisations
— NMSI has submitted a response to the
National Lottery Shares Consultation confirming we strongly support
the proposed redistribution. The HLF is a vital source of capital
funding enabling us to develop and refresh our museums. Any increase
to the funds available will have a beneficial impact on the visitor
experience and our ability to attract visitors to the museum and
region.
— It is important that HLF funds continue
to be available for national organisations and large scale developments.
Other Lottery funding has favoured more grass roots, community
type investment.
6. Whether the policy guidelines for National
Lottery funding need to be reviewed
— NMSI has an important role in leading
public engagement with science. The HLF should ensure it continues
to recognise that science is an important part of culture, and
be explicit in its support of this.
— It is recognised that HLF needs to ensure
public money is wisely invested and desired outcomes achieved.
Monitoring and supervision is an important part of this process,
and one the NMSI carries out internally through its own project
management procedures. HLF could reduce the burden it places on
itself and other organisations when monitoring projects by recognising
the management skills and experience already held by institutions
delivering projects, and taking a lighter touch approach when
appropriate.
— Whilst the application process to HLF
has simplified there is still room for improvement. The HLF should
look towards some of the private major Trusts and Foundations
who regularly donate seven figure sums and how their application
and monitoring process compares.
7. 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 abolition of the UK Film Council
will have a direct impact on the film programme offered by the
National Media Museum which is funded via Yorkshire Screen, which
in itself dependent on UK Film Council funding. There is therefore
uncertainty with regard who the future distributor of such funding
will be.
— The abolition of MLA may see a greater
advisory role placed on national museums, both with Government
and the sector.
— The abolition of the RDA's has had a
direct impact on our major capital development project at the
National Railway Museum, to which Yorkshire Forward had been a
major funder. Such changes increase reliance on the HLF to enable
the delivery of capital projects.
8. Whether business and philanthropists can
play a long-term role in funding arts at a national and local
level
— There is not a culture of responsibility
or duty amongst business and philanthropists to fund our sector:
it is a nice to do and good business sense. We need to develop
a culture where people believe it is right and proper for them
to reinvest a sizeable portion of their wealth into the cultural
sector, regardless of the tax incentives on offer.
— There needs to be a change in culture
amongst those that do give to give significant unrestricted sums
of money. This is commonplace in the Third Sector but not ours.
The Third Sector has developed a sense of trust with its major
funders; that they are the experts and know best how to spend
their income.
9. Whether there needs to be more Government
incentives to encourage private donations
— We agree fundraising is hugely important
and anything to encourage sponsorship and donations is welcomed.
However it is important to recognise this is more easily achieved
in London, whilst major donations and sponsorship is much harder
to achieve and rely on outside of London.
September 2010
|
