Written evidence submitted by Making Music
(arts 198)
1. SUMMARY
1.1 This submission is from Making Music,
formerly known as the National Federation of Music Societies.
We welcome the opportunity to make this contribution to the debate
on arts funding.
1.2 Making Music is the largest umbrella
group in the UK operating in the voluntary arts, with around 3,000
member groups representing some 200,000 voluntary and amateur
arts practitioners.
1.3 Most of our members receive little or
no public subsidy, yet put on 12,500 or so concerts a year and
have a turnover of some £43 million, much of which is spent
with the music industry.
1.4 Our members rely extensively upon us
for practical support, and our Arts Council England grant accordingly
works very hard to support this network.
1.5 Our relationship with Arts Council England
is good, and we strongly support its role in providing arms-length
funding for the arts in England.
1.6 We are concerned that the emphasis on
"front-line" organisations could disadvantage membership
and umbrella organisations such as ourselves upon whom small under-resourced
performing and promoting groups must rely. This would be a mistake,
as without us our members would be unable to afford and resource
their events.
1.7 We feel that there is a barrier to giving
in the arts because of a widespread perception that arts activity
is elitist and self-serving. Consequently we would welcome a much
greater emphasis on the benefits of arts activity to society at
large.
1.8 We would like to see the National Lottery
return to one of its earlier roles of providing small-scale grants
to grass roots organisations. We welcome the return of Lottery
shares to their original purpose.
1.9 We would like to see increased fiscal
incentives for individuals and businesses to support arts organisations
and activity.
1.10We support initiatives to help arts organisations
to work together at an infrastructure level. These must be undertaken
in full cognizance of the practical difficulties. We would especially
welcome capital expenditure to support premises and infrastructure
issues.
1.11 We believe our members offer an example
of the Big Society in action, as the events they promote are strongly
community-focussed and offer opportunities and services to local
people without a call upon the public purse. We would like to
see due recognition of this by both Local Authorities and Government.
2. SUBMISSION
2.1 This submission is from Making Music,
formerly known as the National Federation of Music Societies.
It has been seen and approved by the Board of Management. We welcome
the opportunity to share our views on arts funding with the Select
Committee.
2.2 Making Music is the largest umbrella
group in the UK operating in the voluntary arts. Its members,
numbering nearly 3,000, are all amateur and voluntary arts organisations,
who are responsible for putting on around 12,500 concerts and
events annually, in all parts of the UK. They involve some 200,000
people as active performers and promoters of events. We are an
Arts Council England Regularly Funded Organisation, in receipt
of some £300,000 in 2010-11.
2.3 Like many such umbrella groups Making
Music was formed by its members, its Board and Regional organisations
are elected by its members, and is consequently able to represent
them. But as the largest such group of its kind in the UK, we
also feel able to offer an insight into the world of voluntary
music as a whole.
2.4 Making Music offers a range of services
to support its members and enable them to flourish, especially
in the areas of administration, marketing, artist selection, audience
development and particularly in encouraging them to be active
in their communities. We believe that without such support and
encouragement our members would be less able to achieve the quality
of event that they currently offer, and less able to undertake
the outreach work that is so vital for the future.
2.5 The diversity of Making Music's members
is extensive. They range from traditional classical music organisations
to samba bands, Indian classical music organisations, and steel
pan groups. They encompass large and stable organisations, small
ad hoc groups, and everything in between.
2.6 In making this submission we believe
that we represent the views of the great majority of our members.
Unfortunately there has not been time to consult extensively with
them on these subjects (especially as their activities tend to
be much reduced during the summer holiday period) but our knowledge
of them through our elected representatives and extensive survey
work earlier this summer gives us confidence that we represent
their views accurately.
3. FUNDING OF
THE VOLUNTARY
MUSIC SECTOR
3.1 We believe it fair to say that historically
the voluntary music sector has been funded on a very different
basis to its professional equivalent. Until 1985 the National
Federation of Music Societies [NFMS] was responsible for the distribution
of Government grants to its members; when that responsibility
was removed it continued to play a similar role in some English
regions until as recently as 2007. It now has no such role to
play. Although in some quarters this loss has been lamented, NFMS,
now known as Making Music, has successfully repositioned itself
as a service-based organisation, and judging by its continued
growth is fulfilling a need for its members.
3.2 After the loss of funding from NFMS,
it has been much harder for amateur music groups to access funding
for core activities. Whilst in many cases funds for special projects
are still available and are accessible to amateur groups on an
equal footing with their professional counterparts, there is rarely
the equivalent of the core subsidy available to some professional
orchestras and opera companies. This has caused many groups to
have to scale back their activities; for example by employing
fewer professional musicians, undertaking fewer concerts, hiring
less prestigious venues, reducing community education activities
etc.
3.3 This loss of core funding, whilst disappointing
in some ways, does at least ensure that a) amateur arts activity
is predicated upon a sustainable business model without the need
for external funding sources, and b) the call upon the public
purse from the voluntary sector is negligible. This is significant
in terms of the Big Society initiative (see below at paragraph
9).
3.4 Accordingly, most of our members receive
no public subsidy whatsoever, whether from Arts Council England
(ACE) or their local authority (LA). In spite of this, according
to our 2010 financial survey, they are able to achieve a turnover
of some £43 million, £19 million of which is spent on
professional artists, and donate £1.7 million to charity
along the way. They are a model of value for money in terms of
arts activity.
3.5 Although these are impressive statistics,
it is clearly true that channelling more money into the voluntary
music sector would have beneficial effects, particularly in terms
of being able to undertake more activities within the community.
Many of our members are keen to reach out more extensively into
the communities in which they operate, but find doing so risky.
Additional funds, even on the basis of guarantees against loss,
would yield more extensive and cost-effective results in this
area than an equivalent intervention in the professional sector.
Voluntary music groups could be seen as an under-utilised resource
for delivering social benefits within the community—more
on this is to be found in section 9.
3.6 The biggest funding concern we have
at the moment is in Local Authorities. Their extreme budgetary
constraints will not only, we fear, affect those few groups in
receipt of financial support, but also those who receive in-kind
support such as subsidised venues, free publicity and so on. Although
there is considerable evidence that music groups are providing
significant public services within their communities, they are
rarely given the same priority as more visible third sector service
providers who are in receipt of LA contracts. Where there is no
overt funding relationship LAs can often make decisions that have
(possibly unintended) detrimental consequences to the health of
the local arts ecology. This is a major concern arising from the
threat of cuts and financial constraints.
3.7 It is important to realise that, even
though the sector has a much more robust business model than its
professional equivalents, the Government can ill afford to wash
its hands of financial support for the voluntary music sector,
given the multiplier effects evident from the statistics in paragraph
3.4. In particular the support of infrastructure organisations
such as Making Music is crucial. These organisations provide the
vital support for individual groups that would otherwise be totally
absent. With its £300,000 grant Making Music is able to help
its members undertake the huge range of activity outlined above,
and add considerable value to the subscriptions it charges. We
think this represents excellent value for public money (around
£24 per member event is one way of looking at it). Without
the support of such umbrella groups and infrastructure bodies
the Government would either have to support these groups directly
(very expensive) or see them wither on the vine (surely disastrous
for the cultural life of the nation).
3.8 In summary, the funding of the voluntary
music sector provides superb value for money. But in spite of
this it is relatively fragile; small changes could have significantly
negative effects disproportionate to the amount saved. We believe
infrastructure support remains crucial, offering by far the most
cost-effective way to support a multiplicity of local groups.
Further investment in the voluntary music sector would reap substantial
benefits by offering risk-free ways of undertaking further community-based
activities and outreach programmes.
4. ARTS COUNCIL
ENGLAND
4.1 The principal body supporting the voluntary
music sector in England, largely via its support for Making Music,
is ACE. From our perspective, its recently increased emphasis
on the voluntary sector and its continued funding of our activities
is of course extremely welcome.
4.2 We are aware that there are some highly
influential and senior supporters of the voluntary sector within
ACE, and are very grateful for their support. However, we believe
that it remains true that a number of ACE employees are still
exclusively focussed on supporting professional artists and have
little time for, or interest in, community arts activity. This
we feel is a shame and we would encourage ACE to look at this,
given the huge significance of the voluntary arts, and especially
voluntary music, to the cultural life of the nation.
4.3 Similarly it is important that ACE as
a whole does not see public engagement in the arts purely as developing
audiences for professional artists and arts organisations. From
our point of view, it is equally important to see ACE encouraging
engagement in the form of participation in and learning from arts
activity.
4.4 We believe that ACE plays a vital and
valuable role in the arts in England, and especially under its
new leadership will continue to do so. In our position the abolition
of the UK Film Council and the Museums, Libraries and Archives
Council has little impact; but we would deplore the extension
of this attack on arms-length bodies to encompass the Arts Council.
5. "FRONT-LINE"
ORGANISATIONS
5.1 Much recent rhetoric about potential
cuts has been directed towards trying to preserve, as much as
possible, the support for "front-line" organisations.
Whilst we of course applaud the intention to sustain the delivery
of arts activity, we are concerned that this approach could jeopardise
the status of umbrella groups, who as mentioned above, have a
huge part to play in the support of small grass roots and local
organisations.
5.2 We are quite clear that umbrella groups
are indeed "front-line" organisations in the sense that
arts activity would suffer if their existence were to be compromised.
Indeed, such organisations are uniquely placed to provide much
needed support, particularly in England's rural communities and
amongst diverse groups, where others can fail. Given that direct
financial support for voluntary music organisations is now minimal,
it becomes increasingly important to ensure the health and flourishing
of those bodies that support them.
5.3 At the moment we are not aware of specific
threats to such organisations in England, although drastic steps
have been taken to remove them from the portfolio of the Arts
Council of Wales. Given the major role that infrastructure organisations
can play in delivering the Big Society initiatives, we would obviously
be concerned about a similar move in England.
6. THE NATIONAL
LOTTERY
6.1 The National Lottery has had a chequered
history from the perspective of the voluntary sector. Initially
our members, and indeed we ourselves, benefitted substantially
from programmes such as Arts for Everyone, Arts for Everyone Express,
and more recently Awards for All, offering small-scale grants
on a relatively bureaucracy-free basis. These programmes offered
a level playing field for the voluntary sector, which responded
enthusiastically and accordingly received substantial numbers
of grants for special and unusual projects.
6.2 We recognise that programmes of this
nature were expensive and administratively top-heavy to deliver.
However, we are disappointed to see their almost total demise
in favour of programmes offering larger and more significant grants
more suited to larger arts organisations with professional fundraising
staff.
6.3 We think there is a potential role for
independent infrastructure organisations to offer small-scale
grants on an agreed basis on behalf of lottery distributors. Whilst
this approach is currently very much out of favour, we feel it
is the only way of ensuring a cost-effective method of distributing
small grants, which remain a very welcome way of supporting grass
roots arts activity.
6.4 If this is not possible for any reason,
we would strongly recommend reintroducing a small grants scheme
such as Awards for All into ACE's portfolio of grant programmes.
6.5 Naturally we welcome the redistribution
of Lottery income to retrieve the income lost to activities that
should have remained within the Government's core remit.
7. INDIVIDUAL
PHILANTHROPY AND
BUSINESS SUPPORT
7.1 Historically these sources of support
have been less relevant to the voluntary sector, except in individual
local situations. We would welcome an increased emphasis on these,
particularly reflecting the fact that many wealthy individuals
and senior managers can often be active amateur musicians themselves.
7.2 There is certainly scope for better
tax incentives, and we would welcome any initiatives in this area,
which can only be of benefit to the overall climate.
7.3 Even more significantly, we would welcome
a much greater emphasis on the benefits of arts activity to society
at large. We feel that there is a barrier to giving in the arts
because of a widespread perception that arts activity is elitist
and self-serving; creating lots of enjoyment for the participants
but little benefit to society as a whole. Those of us involved
in the arts know that this is only a tiny part of the picture—benefits
to society are massive, including huge effects on the population's
physical and mental health. We would like to see DCMS and ACE
playing a greater role in promoting this awareness, which would,
we believe, encourage greater philanthropy than currently exists.
8. WORKING TOGETHER
8.1 Much emphasis is currently being placed
on whether arts organisations can work together to reduce infrastructure
costs and create economies of scale. Whilst in general we would
welcome such an initiative, the practical difficulties are immense
and need to be handled with great care.
8.2 Heavy-handed attempts to force this
to happen under the threat of funding withdrawal have in the past
been unhelpful in promoting a constructive atmosphere. Instead
ACE could perhaps offer a more positive approach by actually offering
combined services and infrastructure in return for a reduced grant.
8.3 Probably the most beneficial way in
which organisations could work together is by sharing premises.
We believe the Government should consider the purchase of one
or more buildings as an investment in the arts, allowing rent
free access to approved arts organisations. Retaining these buildings
as assets would be a very cost-effective way of offering support
to the arts with little outlay from the revenue budget.
9. THE BIG
SOCIETY
9.1 We welcome the Government's emphasis
on community-led initiatives under the umbrella title of the Big
Society.
9.2 We contend that amateur musical groups
are exemplars of exactly the sort of organisation which the Government
hopes to encourage under this banner. They organise 12,500 events
a year to audiences of around 1.6 million people, and in so doing
offer a huge range of opportunities to the music profession, with
whom they spend some £19 million. And they do this with very
little call upon the public purse.
9.3 Such groups are organised locally by
local people. They promote events to local audiences and spend
money with local venues and businesses. They are "by the
community, for the community, in the community". What is
the Big Society if not that?
9.4 Although the notion of Big Society is
about self-help and sustainable practice, the role of independent
infrastructure organisations is of vital importance in the successful
delivery of these initiatives. This is another area in which proper
support for these organisations is of crucial significance. Voluntary
music groups can be focussed on their own regular participation/rehearsal
and performances, and a major strand of our work is to encourage
greater collaboration with other community groups and civil society
activities to realise the underutilised potential of the voluntary
music sector. The scale of the voluntary music sector provides
potential for it to play a much greater role in strengthening
communities throughout the country and realising the Big Society,
given the right level of support from organisations such as Making
Music.
9.5 We would welcome the opportunity to
discuss with the Government how such a powerful movement has grown
up and what can be done to strengthen it and replicate it in other
areas of society.
September 2010
| 
