Written evidence submitted by the Institute
for Creative Enterprise (ICE), Coventry University (arts 56)
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 This response has been prepared by Christine
Hamilton, Director of the Institute for Creative Enterprise (ICE),
Coventry University, on behalf of the Institute. ICE provides
the bridge between creative graduates of this university (and
others in the West Midlands) and the wider creative industries.
We work with those who are leaving university with a BA or MA
in Performing Arts, Design and Visual Arts, Media and Communications
and Industrial Design. We support the graduates to find jobs,
develop their own businesses and to gain knowledge via placements,
mentoring and training in the creative industries sector.
1.2 ICE also works closely with established
businesses on knowledge transfer, the development of creative
practice, and new skills in management and leadership. Recent
projects include: developing with the Belgrade Theatre a tool
for designers and technicians to create sets in a virtual 3d setting
to uncover and solve problems; supporting dance companies to work
with older people with memory loss; and running creative labs
for businesses wishing to develop commercial projects using digital
tools.
1.3 ICELab, our research arm focuses on
two areas of work: Cultural Policy and Society and Capturing Creativity|Digital
Culture.
1.4 The comments below are in relation to
the points relevant to our experience working with the arts—particularly
in the interface between art an commerce.
2. SUMMARY OF
OUR RESPONSE
— The proposed cuts will not only have
an effect on the creative future of artists and the subsidised
sector in England, it will also damage the commercial aspects
of the creative industries which rely on creative talent. This,
in turn will have an effect on the global impact of the country.
— The proposed cuts will have a deeper
and more long term effect in the regions of England.
— Arts organisations are already very skilled
at working in partnership and while there may be further savings
to be made in terms of "back room" functions these are
likely to be minimal.
— There is no ideal "level of funding"
and no international benchmarks figures which offer strict comparability.
However there are differences in approach across the UK.
— The restoration of the original distribution
mechanisms for the National Lottery would go some way to saving
arts and heritage—although it may be too late by the time
this is done.
— Businesses and philanthropists can help
to support the arts, and they already do. However, there is a
reluctance on the side of the philanthropist to replace public
funding; and there is never going to be enough coming from this
source to fill the gap which is emerging. This is a particular
issue for areas which do not have HQs of large businesses or have
low profile activity.
3. RESPONSE
3.1 Impact of cuts
3.1.1 At the moment we do not know the exact
level of public sector cuts on the arts and heritage but the picture
is gloomy. As with previous squeezes on expenditure, this affects
the arts from two directions: national government support via
the Arts Council and local government support. Some of our arts
and heritage institutions will close with loss of jobs.
3.1.2 Our concern, however, is the hidden
cost of creative artists unable to develop their work and their
career whose imagination and creativity fuel a wider creative
economy. J.K. Rowling wrote her first Harry Potter thanks to a
grant from the Scottish Arts Council. Now she is one of the richest
women in the UK and has not only supported a publishing and film
industry, she is also a personal philanthropist in the area of
medical research.
3.1.3 Of course not all artists are as successful
as Rowling, but our music business, games and film industries,
broadcasting output and design industries of all sorts, depend
on the individual creative idea. In the digital world content
is king and it is here where we have global impact.
3.1.4 It is our experience that those working
as individual artists are also sole traders. They are flexible
and creative in earning money as they are in creating work. We
work day in and day out with artists who move with ease between
the private and public sectors. However this is a knife edge existence
and pull away the public sector organisations with which they
work, and they will no longer have a sustainable existence as
artists. Our research has shown the importance of networks for
innovation and creativity. We have just over 1,000 people on our
creative network, Emerge. The livelihoods of everyone of
these people is at stake and when multiplied across the country,
this is a significant.
3.1.5 We also believe from our work that
the proposed cuts will cause greater and longer term damage to
first and second tier cities. London has to be supported to continue
to be a global city in all aspects of our cultural life—particularly
in light of 2012. However, cities like Newcastle/Gateshead, Leeds,
Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham and Bristol will struggle to
hold on to the great gains they have made in the infrastructure
and their cultural output-—particularly on regional museums.
Cities like Coventry will find it even harder in light of the
size of the investment they can expect to receive in the city.
Successful strategies for growth in recent years by "second
tier cities" have supported a rich cultural infrastructure
but they are not mature or deep enough to survive the proposed
cuts and will push many into economic gloom and set back regeneration
plans.
3.1.6 We cannot ignore the loss of a regional
structure. The whole of the West Midlands has effectively been
dismantled with the end of the regional development agency, the
government office, the screen agency and the re-organisation of
the Arts Council. In Coventry there are two universities, a world-renowned
cathedral building, the largest arts centre in England, the first
new civic theatre to be built post war, an award winning art gallery
and museum—and all that within 20 miles of the birthplace
of our national bard. It is scarcely credible that this city could
have its arts at risk because there will be no local, regional
or national fund to provide the little support it requires to
survive.
3.2 Partnership working
3.2.1 Along with the assumption that all
artists are bad at businesses (quite the opposite) goes the idea
that the problem is that arts organisations are badly run and
do not share resources. We can point to several examples of partnership
working here in Coventry alone:
— Theatre Absolute and Artspace working
with city development department have worked to transform a post-recession
city centre by taking over empty shops and converting them into
art spaces.
— As mentioned above, the Belgrade Theatre
working with Coventry University and a freelance artist to develop
a new product for theatre technicians, ready to go to market.
— Co-production between Belgrade Theatre
and Talking Birds about the time Coventry City won the FA Cup.
— Collaboration across Coventry and Warwickshire
museums to bring out the treasures of the area—in collaboration
with the local BBC Radio station.
— Four creative companies in Coventry rent
space here at ICE and share resources in terms of meeting space,
networking events etc.
3.2.2 Across the country there are many
examples of collaborations, partnership working and joint initiatives.
It is true to say that not many arts and heritage institutions
share back room functions: payroll for example. However this is
normally such a small part of their costs there is little to m=be
made in teh way of savings here.
3.3 Level of funding
3.3.1 There is no "ideal" level
of funding for the arts. There is not international bench mark—funding
systems differ across the globe. Rather it is a matter of agreeing
what funding will provide. The arts play hugely important role
in education and supporting work in areas of health, prisons,
social services etc. The arts also contribute to our tourist offer
and, as already said, underpin economic growth in the creative
industries and the wider knowledge economy. However perhaps least
tangible is the most significant: this is something we are good
at and is incalculable in terms of our national esteem and matters
in global terms.
3.3.2 The Committee should be encouraged
to bear in mind that, with the exception of the National Lottery,
and some aspects of the support for film, all its areas of discussion
apply only to England. While clearly other parts of the UK are
also facing cuts in cultural funding, there is no certainty that
they will be at the same level. A talent drain to Wales, Scotland
or Northern Ireland may not seem, on the face of it, as a particular
threat to England when viewed from London. However the regional
cities of England might find this plays differently with them
with challenges from Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff, Belfast and
now Derry.
3.4 National Lottery
3.4.1 The proposal to restore funding proportions
to the arts and heritage sectors after 2012 is welcome and brings
the situation back to the initial years of lottery funding. It
was an early pledge by a previous Conservative Government that
Lottery funding would not be used to replace public funding. (This
would be in contrast to almost every state lottery from elsewhere
in the world, where lottery money has been used to support government
projects and in the UK we have seen public projects such as the
Big Lottery and the delivery of the Olympics being lottery-sponsored).
In the final analysis however, it is not the source of the money
which matters but how it is spent and if additional lottery funding
will help to save our arts infrastructure it should be welcomed.
3.5 Sponsorship and Philanthropy
3.5.1 There is a misunderstanding of the
current position. Arts organisations work hard, and with some
success, in developing sponsors.
3.5.2 From all media reports on this it
seems unlikely that sponsors and philanthropists would be interested
in replacing public funding. They see their role as adding to
it.
3.5.3 More pertinent is the amount of money
available. Bank of America Merrill Lynch spends US$40 million[31]
globally each year, less than Arts Council Wales.
3.5.4 An example: the Belgrade Theatre is
about to re-mount a very successful show about the Coventry blitz—its
third run and this time in a bigger space with potentially and
audience of around 900 per night. Despite efforts, no local business
has shown any interest in supporting this production—a sure-fire
success—for 5k sponsorship, a great deal less than the initial
public investment.
3.5.5 It might be possible to improve the
situation with tax incentives (which do exist in the USA). However
it is more of a cultural difference than a fiscal one.
September 2010
31 http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/theatreblog/2010/aug/03/arts-funding-banks-merrill-lynch Back
| 
