Written evidence submitted by Renaissance
Yorkshire Museums Hub (arts 204)
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 This response is submitted by Museums
Sheffield on behalf of the Renaissance Yorkshire Museums Hub.
The Hub comprises Bradford Museums and Galleries, Leeds Museums
and Galleries, Hull Museums, York Museums Trust and Museums Sheffield
(Lead Partner).
2. SUMMARY OF
KEY POINTS
2.1 Public investment into regional museums
in recent years is paying off. Museums and galleries are increasingly
seen as attractive, vibrant places to visit. Visits to Yorkshire
Hub museums have increased by 75% since 2002. But the high quality
experience that people are enjoying in unprecedented numbers as
a result of this investment emanates from the efforts of whole
organisations. Collections care and knowledge underpins exhibitions
and displays; learning and community programmes inform, and are
informed by, collections knowledge. All activity is linked and
it would be a fallacy to believe that savings can be made without
having an impact on front line services.
2.2 Public sector cuts will have a profound
effect on regional museums and will emanate from numerous directions.
The biggest impact will be cuts imposed through parent bodies
such as local authorities, followed by cuts to the Renaissance
programme.
2.3 Detrimental effects in relation to jobs,
collections care, exhibitions, school and lifelong learning programmes,
community and outreach activity and support for other regional
museums are unavoidable.
2.4 Evidence shows that museums contribute
to increased educational attainment, stronger communities and
community cohesion. They work with people who are least likely
to see themselves as part of the Big Society.
2.5 Museums are an important but underestimated
part of the visitor offer, with the financial benefits accruing
to the region's economy not the museums themselves.
2.6 Cutbacks in service will make it more
difficult for museums to generate their own commercial income,
further impacting on their sustainability.
2.7 The planning and consideration of culture
at a national level should be considered by a single body rather
than a government department and numerous arms length bodies.
2.8 The delivery mechanism and funding for
the Renaissance programme should be given urgent attention to
avoid unnecessary redundancy processes and stalling of activity
3. THE IMPACT
THAT RECENT
AND FUTURE
SPENDING CUTS
WILL HAVE
ON THE
ARTS AND
HERITAGE
The extent and scope of the impact
3.1 The museum sector, along with all other
public services, is preparing itself for cuts to its funding.
For many regional museums the biggest impact will come through
cuts to local authority core funding; cuts between 30% and 40%
are currently being modelled. As a non-statutory service museums
have always had to argue their case against big players such as
schools and social services. Many now expect that they, along
with other culture and heritage services, will be an easy target
for cutbacks at the highest end of the scale.
3.2 Since 2004 the Renaissance programme
has also brought central government money into regional museums
for the first time to build capacity and enable them to extend
their reach to more people. This has led to vastly improved visitor
experiences resulting from investment in education services, community
engagement and better collections care. In Yorkshire, Hub museums
currently receive on average 17% of their funding from Renaissance,
over half of which is spent on people. Add this to the anticipated
reductions in core funding and many Hub museums will be facing
reductions in their operational budgets in the region of 50%.
3.3 In addition, museums understand the
advantages of plural funding streams and have been working hard
to diversify their income base. Unfortunately, many of these alternatives
also emanate from the public sector. This means that museums will
not only suffer cuts to their main income streams, but also numerous
other cuts which will compound the problem. Some of the following
have been confirmed; others remain the subject of speculation:
— Loss of Arts Council England (ACE) funding,
eg reduction in numbers of regularly funded organisations (RFOs).
— Decline in partnership activity with
National Museums.
— Investment from regional development
agencies which are to close, eg Yorkshire Forward.
— Reductions in funding from government
departments other than DCMS, for example Department for Education
(Strategic Commissioning), Ministry of Defence (military museums),
Department of Health (partnerships with Primary Care Trusts).
— Decline in other commissioning programmes
as organisations operate increasingly in-house to retain their
own core staff.
— Some local authorities are reviewing
rate reductions for charities and rents for museum premises.
— Financial insecurity in schools means
that they are booking later, making it harder for museums to respond
to their needs. Schools are also looking increasingly to parents
to finance visits which will further disadvantage children from
deprived areas.
— Reduction in commercial business, sponsorship
and other partnership funding from private sector companies that
rely themselves on public sector business.
3.4 Even where funding streams are available,
for example National Lottery, many museums will find lack of capacity
and match funding to be an obstacle in accessing them.
The effect on museums
3.5 It is anticipated that museums which
are directly or indirectly (eg through Trusts) delivering services
on behalf of local authorities will undergo extensive restructuring
and downsizing. The current signs are that they will be under
political pressure to keep all sites open rather than being allowed
to take a more strategic response to reviewing their cost base.
Therefore, in order to make the required savings there will be
a disproportionate loss of people, particularly in collections,
learning and curatorial teams, as they try to protect sites and
opening hours. Therefore a 20% reduction in people overall could
translate into a 75% cut within specialist teams. Additionally
this loss of expertise will make recovery harder once the funding
position improves and will undermine long term sustainability.
3.6 Falling back to a position of caretaker
services means that collections care will inevitably suffer. Collections
are the lifeblood of museums, part of our shared national heritage.
Museums are charged with safeguarding, developing and making accessible
collections of local, national and international significance.
The collections, the people and the attendant knowledge are at
the heart of all museum activity, driving exhibitions, learning
programmes and events. They add the authenticity which makes museums
into much more than simply visitor attractions.
3.7 Exhibitions are expensive, both in direct
costs and staff time. Cuts will mean fewer temporary exhibitions.
The ones that remain will be lower cost and therefore less high
profile, attracting fewer tourists and visitors. Museums have
also worked hard to ensure that exhibitions are created with a
whole service approach; therefore loss of audience development,
community and learning staff will also have a detrimental impact
on the quality of the end product.
3.8 The Renaissance programme placed a high
value on education and reaching new audiences. This achieved a
substantial increase in learning and outreach activity, particularly
school visits, which will be unsustainable in the future. As far
as possible museums will wish to protect learning along with other
front line activity; however it is inevitable that jobs will be
lost and activity will decrease.
3.9 Through outreach activity museums have
worked hard to attract non-traditional visitors, such as those
on lower incomes or from minority ethnic backgrounds. Reduced
expenditure in this area will resurrect the perception that museums
are elitist and "not for the likes of us".
3.10 Renaissance, complemented by MLA's
regional activity, also provides support to the wider museum community,
from the smallest independent museums to those run by large unitary
authorities. This increases the sustainability and quality of
museum provision with the resultant benefits accruing to communities
and the economy. Should this support mechanism be lost the impact
would be to fragment and isolate the sector. There would be a
loss of expertise, facilitation and partnership building—in
fact everything that makes museums a sector rather than a number
of isolated and disconnected services.
Social impacts
3.11 Having considered the impact on museums
as organisations, this section will consider the resulting effect
on the people they serve.
"Museums enable people to explore collections
for inspiration, learning and enjoyment. They are institutions
that collect, safeguard and make accessible artefacts and specimens,
which they hold in trust for society."
Museums Association
3.12 Across the country museums inspire
hundreds of thousands of school children every year. However,
cuts at the level currently predicted will put much of this in
jeopardy. In Hub museums many learning staff are Renaissance funded
and some will lose their jobs. Non-Hub museums will be affected
by cuts to the DCMS/DfE Strategic Commissioning programme. School
visit numbers will fall and there will be more self guided visits
rather than those facilitated by knowledgeable and enthusiastic
staff. The quality and range of programmes will decrease. In addition,
there may a further impact from schools themselves being unable
to afford trips away from school.
3.13 Why does this matter? Learning and
training cannot be delivered solely through the formal education
system. People need to access learning opportunities in a variety
of places and in ways which suit their circumstances and learning
styles. Evidence shows that museums contribute to increased educational
attainment by school children. They provide a stimulating learning
environment and positively influence attitudes to learning and
education. They encourage creativity in the broadest sense.
3.14 Museums reach out to communities and
minority audiences, often those in the most disadvantaged areas.
They support, and are supported by, thousands of volunteers—over
100,000 in the independent sector alone. This is currently described
as the Big Society and museums have been doing it for years.
3.15 Community engagement work will be a
casualty of funding cuts. Museums involve everyone in preserving,
defining and exploring identity and heritage. It is in-depth work,
staff intensive over a long period of time, therefore expensive
and vulnerable. But this kind of activity is vital if the Big
Society is to flourish. Museums work with people who are least
likely to see themselves as part of a Big Society; they may be
the first to extend the hand of friendship and encouragement.
The Big Society needs a thriving museum sector.
Financial impact
3.16 A recent speech by the Prime Minister
drew attention to the value of tourism to the UK economy. Driven
strongly by the heritage sector and often underestimated, it is
the country's third highest export earner. The contribution of
museums and galleries to the heritage sector is also often overlooked.
However, recent research in Yorkshire demonstrates the value of
museums and galleries to the regional visitor economy. Museums
and galleries, as a group, are more popular than all other types
of Yorkshire attraction within overseas, domestic and local markets.
Visitors to the region rate museums and galleries as the best
of Yorkshire: the only thing better is the scenery. Delivering
high visitor satisfaction they are a powerful proposition for
the affluent short break market and are a major draw for the growing
family market. (Popular, prized and full of potential: Yorkshire
Museums and the tourist offer; Wafer Hadley, 2010.)
3.17 However, as important as museums and
galleries are to tourism, the associated economic benefits are
felt by the region's economy not by museums themselves. And whilst
they are becoming ever more entrepreneurial in raising earned
income they will always be a net contributor to tourism rather
than a beneficiary. Therefore a decline in museum activity will
have an adverse effect on the region's economy.
3.18 Museums also act as a multiplier within
the creative and digital economies. Their recent increased spending
power has helped companies in this economic area to build up their
businesses as they assist with exhibitions, print and digital
design, learning programmes and outreach events. In return, museum
and gallery teams are strong supporters of the output from creative
companies. Reduction of museum funding will inevitably have a
dampening effect on the creative and digital economy, just at
a time when it is seen as being of great importance for the future
prosperity of the UK.
3.19 Museums and galleries are becoming
ever more entrepreneurial as they seek to increase their levels
of earned income. Improvements in catering and merchandising,
cultivation of sponsors and donors, hosting weddings and events
are all playing a part. However, this success is underpinned by
the fact that they are energetic, successful organisations with
vibrant exhibitions, attractive venues and enthusiastic, knowledgeable
staff. It therefore follows that if this attraction is diminished
so will their appeal to clients and sponsors. Cuts in public funding
will be accompanied by a reduced ability to generate commercial
income.
4. STRUCTURE
OF FUNDING
DISTRIBUTION, PARTICULARLY
IN THE
LIGHT OF
THE ABOLITION
OF MLA
4.1 At the time of writing the abolition
of MLA is known but we await further announcements about the future
of other agencies and arms length bodies. We can only speculate
about which of MLA's functions will survive and who will be given
the responsibility of delivering them.
4.2 Clearly for Renaissance Hub museums
the future of the Renaissance programme is vital. Whilst it is
accepted that programmes such as these should be regularly reviewed
to ensure they deliver effectively and efficiently, it is hoped
that changes will be introduced in a way that safeguards previous
investment. In particular, should there be a loss of Hub status
for some museums, this should be done in a measured way to avoid
compounding their financial misery. The delivery mechanism and
funding for the Renaissance programme should be given urgent attention
to avoid unnecessary job losses and stalling of activity.
4.3 The planning and consideration of culture
at a national level should be considered by a single body rather
than a government department and numerous arms length bodies.
This would allow comparison of investment across the cultural
sector and a single point of information, direction, evaluation
and strategy. It would eliminate the current anomaly within museums
where the Nationals work directly to DCMS whilst regional services
are channelled though MLA. National museums in many cases deliver
the same range and standards of service as the very best independent
and local authority services and each could learn through closer
links with the others.
4.4 A single body could compel a strategic
approach to public investment in the arts and heritage within
a city rather than the current piecemeal approach. It could also
encourage economies of scale by a strategic lead to identify those
areas of activity which would realise the biggest benefits.
4.5 The concept of a single body would also
address current concerns about the fragmentation of the sector
as the future of MLA functions is considered, for example Accreditation,
Renaissance, Portable Antiquities Scheme. This would be compounded
should an organisation the size of the Arts Council be charged
with responsibility without a fundamental revision of its overall
mission and purpose.
5. NATIONAL LOTTERY
FUNDING
5.1 The proposal to restore the share of
Lottery funding to heritage projects is welcomed. Consideration
should also be given to offering revenue funding for a number
of years in order to maximise the public benefit of capital funding.
A legal agreement with stakeholder groups to secure such funding
would ensure commitment to the future of the investment.
5.2 Cuts in public sector finance are changing
the demand for HLF funding. Anecdotal evidence suggests that large
capital projects are in decline. It should also be recognised
that reductions in numbers of staff and revenue funding will be
a barrier to museums in taking advantage of all levels of Lottery
funding.
5.3 It is understood that HLF will be asked
to reduce their administrative costs which could reduce the time
they have to spend on pre-application support. This will disadvantage
new applicants, giving more funding to previous beneficiaries.
6. THE ROLE
OF BUSINESSES
AND PHILANTHROPISTS
6.1 The role of businesses and philanthropists
is inextricably linked to Government incentives, particularly
tax incentives. The current gift aid scheme is generous; however
it is complicated and there seems to be little encouragement for
take up.
6.2 The UK does not have strong tradition
of philanthropy, whilst competition for the attention of those
we have is fierce. If the Government is committed to encouraging
more philanthropy this needs to form part of a comprehensive long
term strategy
6.3 Those private companies and individuals
who choose to sponsor the arts want to be associated with excellence.
Should cuts in public sector finance have an adverse effect on
quality then support from such donors will decrease.
September 2010
| 
