Written evidence submitted by Orchestras
Live (arts 82)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
— Sustained public investment in the arts
has been maintained for the past 15 years. Public investment in
the arts is extremely small in relation to overall public spending.
— An erosion of that public investment
will immediately undermine the positive effect it has had over
the past 15 years.
— The maintenance of both central and local
Government funding for the arts is essential.
— Private funding cannot replace a shortfall
in public funding for the arts—they are mutually dependent.
— The role of national organisations like
Orchestras Live in coordinating national programmes for arts distribution
is effective in reducing duplication of effort and achieving economies
of scale.
— The maintenance of Arts Council England
as an internationally acknowledged, expert and independent public
body for the distribution of public funding of the arts is essential.
— The Government's proposed changes to
the distribution of National Lottery funds are welcome.
— Relatively small amounts of public funds
are proven to lever significant private and commercial investment.
The UK's mixed economy model of arts funding is both unique and
effective. It also reinforces the function of public subsidy as
a lever for additional funding (on a ratio of 1:2) and has also
helped to underpin the success of Britain's creative economy over
the past 10 years.
1. Introduction
1.1 Is the national development agency for
professional orchestral music, working intensively in partnership
with local authorities and other promoters throughout England.
Our mission is to inspire, motivate and empower the widest range
of people through excellent professional live orchestral music.
1.2 In 2009-10, Orchestras Live supported
activity which reached over 83,000 people. This was achieved through
support for more than 304 events in partnership with 69 local
authorities and other promoters across England. These events involved
37 professional orchestras and included formal and informal concerts,
concerts for children and families, community and education projects
ranging from half-day workshops to year-round residencies.
1.3 Orchestras Live is pleased to submit
evidence to this important inquiry as a long-standing recipient
of public funding from Government via Arts Council England. Orchestras
Live works in partnership with 69 local authorities throughout
England and has since 1986, through its predecessor body the Eastern
Orchestral Board, established a very successful track record in
using central Government funding to lever local Government and
other funding to support the delivery of excellent professional
orchestral programmes for communities that do not have regular
access to this work. Public subsidy is an essential source of
income for arts organisations like ours and the inquiry raises
some important questions, the conclusions of which will have a
significant impact on the future health of the arts and heritage
sector.
2. 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?
2.1 The Arts in England are a success, underpinned
by 15 years of sustained investment, including the introduction
of the National Lottery in 1994. Furthermore the arts budget is
very small in comparison to other areas of public spending. It
currently costs around 17p per week per person. And for every
£1 of public money that is invested in the arts, a further
£2 is generated from commercial and private sources—a
ratio of 1:2.
2.2 An erosion in the current public funding
base both locally and nationally will undo the beneficial effects
of the positive pattern of sustained investment over the past
15 years.
2.3 In many arts sectors, the relationship
between central and local Government funding is an essential component
towards a successful and balanced funding ecology. Our own organisation,
Orchestras Live has a successful track record in using central
Government funding (from DCMS via the Arts Council) to lever significant
additional local authority funding. In the last financial year
(2009-10) our Arts Council funding of £815,000 yielded an
additional £362,000 in partnership funding, of which £262,000
came from approximately 60 local authorities, working in partnership
with us across England.
2.4 The unique model which exists in the
UK between public funding and private and commercial support is
one in which the balance is mutually dependent. A reduction in
public funding on either a national or a local level will inevitably
create an income shortfall which the private and commercial sector
will struggle to restore.
2.5 As an inevitable consequence the range,
activity and output of arts organisations will reduce. However,
fixed running costs including overheads and salaries are likely
to stay at their current level. And the arts sector as a whole
will cease to offer the current "value for money proposition"
expressed as a ratio of fixed costs to output that it does now.
2.6 Orchestras Live is representative of
many arts organisations in that its impact is considerably greater
than its size. The skills, experience and expertise that underpins
our partnerships across England are located in our small staff
team of six. The maintenance of that team is essential to ensure
the ongoing successful delivery of our work on a national scale.
In common with other arts organisations of our size we have comparatively
limited options to accommodate spending cuts.
3. What arts organisations can do to work
more closely together in order to reduce duplication of effort
and to make economies of scale;
3.1 Obvious examples are the sharing of
administration services, particularly in the areas of finance
and human resources.
3.2 There is also scope for the greater
exploitation of digital resources to create economies of scale
and to drive down costs, particularly in the areas of marketing
and publicity.
3.3 Policies for joint procurement for services,
particularly among larger-scale arts organizations will be important;
for example the recent collaboration between a number of large-scale
London based arts organisations on a joint energy procurement
plan which drives down the unit cost to each and offers greater
value for money.
3.4 An issue which is of particular relevance
to Orchestras Live is the co-ordination of national programmes
which promote greater access to and greater and wider distribution
of excellent art, particularly to communities and parts of the
country away from large urban centres of population where the
access to quality art is limited. Orchestras Live Concerts delivers
the best of the UK's chamber orchestral programmes to 28 promoters
throughout England whose audiences would not normally have access
to this work. In this year, working through strategic partnership
with professional orchestras and promoters, we will co-promote
57 concerts by 18 professional chamber orchestras across seven
English regions with an emphasis on programming the work of living
composers and newly commissioned work. The national co-ordination
that we bring to this work avoids duplication of effort and delivers
economies of scale where one concert programme can be repeated
in other parts of the country.
3.5 Orchestras Live Concerts is just one
example of this kind of activity. In the classical music sector,
the Sheffield based organisation, Music in the Round delivers
a similar model for chamber music. And more widely in the music
sector, funding for consortia of promoters (for example, Music
beyond the Mainstream) has enabled international large-scale world
music to be shared among a community of promoters delivering significant
economies of scale and maximising the partnership between arts
organisations.
4. What level of public subsidy for the arts
and heritage is necessary and sustainable;
4.1 The evidence of the last 15 years shows
that the current levels of public subsidy with annual allowances
for inflation are necessary to retain the positive momentum of
the last 15 years. As for the sustainability, the average cost
of public funding for the arts per person is just 17p per week—a
very small proportion of overall public spending. The argument
for the sustainability of that investment is further reinforced
by the level of return where for every £1 of public subsidy,
a further £2 is generated through private and commercial
sources.
4.2 Moreover the link between public subsidy
for the arts and commercial return is now proven. Public subsidy
for the arts plays a vital role in the evolution of talent within
the creative industries, which are an essential component of the
future competitiveness of British business and are acknowledged
as our best route out of recession. Between 1997 and 2006 the
creative economy grew faster than any other sector, accounting
for two million jobs and £16.6 billion of exports in 2007.
4.3 To further support the sustainability
argument, the position of the arts and heritage sector as one
of the "crown jewels" of UK society foregrounds the
role of the sector as a prime lever for incoming tourism in the
UK. Arts and culture are central to tourism in the UK, worth £86
billion in 2007—3.7% of GDP—and directly employed
1.4 million people. Inbound tourism is a crucial earner of exports
for the UK economy, worth £16.3 billion to the UK economy
in 2008.
5. Whether the current system, and structure,
of funding distribution is the right one;
5.1 The Government's commitment to "arms
length" funding presumes that the retention of the Arts Council
as a non departmental public body remains a priority. Put simply,
if the Arts Council didn't exist, then Government would need to
establish a similar body to ensure the independent distribution
of public subsidy to the arts sector without political influence.
5.2 Arts Council England is recognized worldwide
as an exemplar body for the distribution of public subsidy for
the arts. It has the authority and expertise to represent the
arts sector and to advocate for its ongoing vibrancy and health.
5.3 Furthermore funding from Arts Council
England acts as an endorsement and an indicator of high quality.
This stamp of approval is proven to lever partnership funding
from the private sector and philanthropic sources, particularly
private charitable Trusts and Foundations.
5.4 Through its recent consultation—Great
Art for Everyone—which set out Arts Council England's
10-year vision for the Arts, the Arts Council advocated the introduction
of more flexible funding arrangements for the Arts. These proposed
measures are welcome and should deliver a less hierarchical and
more fit for purpose mechanism for funding the arts.
6. What impact recent changes to the distribution
of National Lottery funds will have on arts and heritage organisations;
6.1 We understand this question to relate
to the Government's proposals (recently opened to public consultation)
to restore the balance of distribution of National Lottery funds
to their original good causes of the arts, sport and heritage.
If enacted, the effect of these changes will be positive. Specifically,
an increase in the share of lottery funds for the arts will mean
that arts organisations will be able to increase the impact of
the delivery of their priorities, in particular in relation to
broadening their reach and delivery of education projects in addition
to their core activity.
7. Whether the policy guidelines for National
Lottery funding need to be reviewed;
7.1 There have been historic issues over
the restrictions governing the use of National Lottery funding
which in the past have inhibited strategies to combine Lottery
and Treasury funding in the most cost effective way. Policy guidelines
for National Lottery funding should be reviewed to ensure that
they are sufficiently flexible for its investment to work strategically,
effectively and flexibly alongside Treasury funding.
8. 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;
8.1 Currently the impact of these changes
remains unclear. Our concern would be that of those DCMS arms
length bodies that remain, the Arts Council is not expected to
assume responsibility for the work and activity of either the
abolished Film Council or the MLA.
8.2 Recently the Arts Council has evolved
into a strong, efficient, outward looking organisation. It has
amply demonstrated its commitment to drive down costs while maintaining
the quality and effectiveness of its advice, support and expertise.
8.3 Any expectation therefore from Government
that the Arts Council should assume additional responsibilities
without additional resource would compromise the core mission
of the Arts Council and undermine its success over the past 15
years in championing the arts in England.
9. Whether businesses and philanthropists
can play a long-term role in funding arts at a national and local
level;
9.1 The UK is renowned for its unique mixed
model of arts funding. The evidence of the last 15 years confirms
that small amounts of public money work hard to stimulate a mixed
economy culture that is internationally acknowledged and which
delivers a real return for the country both in economic terms,
and in terms of quality of life and the cohesion of society and
communities
9.2 In the UK, a modern and progressive
model for cultural organisations has been developed which brings
together public funding and private enterprise. However the model
is finely balanced and if public funding is significantly reduced,
the knock-on effect will be profound and the private sector will
not be in a position to make good reductions in public funding.
9.3 In the current economic climate, the
maintenance of public funding for the Arts is more important than
ever. Commercial and philanthropic organisations will be facing
financial challenges. This is particularly true of the Trust and
Foundation sector in the UK which relies upon the performance
of large capital funds as the means to support their grant giving
to arts organisations. It would be a dangerous assumption to make
that commercial and philanthropic giving could replace reductions
in public funding for the arts.
10. Whether there need to be more Government
incentives to encourage private donations
10.1 As we have previously stated, the award
of funding from an independent national funding body with proven
artistic knowledge and expertise such as the Arts Council is already
proven to be an effective incentive which levers funding from
the private sector and philanthropic sources.
10.2 We would advocate reform of the current
structure of the HMRC Gift Aid scheme to make it more user friendly
for individual giving to the Arts.
September 2010
| 
