Written evidence submitted by the Department
of Culture at Manchester City Council (arts 95)
SUMMARY:
— Given the relatively small scale of many
arts and heritage organisations, there is limited capacity to
absorb cuts without significant impacts for both artistic and
education programmes. While there may be scope for some restructure
the savings would not be achievable soon enough to prevent long
term damage to their delivery.
— Arts organisations are already working
towards collaboration. This could lead to a more robust approach
to funding and deliver better value in the long term. However
a period of transition is needed to safeguard the infrastructure
and prevent the loss of valuable knowledge and skills.
— Public funding is an essential part of
the mixed economy.
— The moves to rationalise the range of
funders is a positive one, provided specialist expertise and important
investment programmes and professional standards are maintained.
There is also a need to introduce greater flexibility so that
new initiatives can establish while securing long term investment.
— The intention to increase the Lottery
funds available to the arts and heritage is welcomed.
— National Lottery Policy should allow
the opportunity for early recipients to return for funds.
— While the government has announced the
abolition of some DCMS arms-length bodies, it is not yet clear
how or if the functions of these organisations will be placed
with other organisations. Sector specific investment is essential
to continue and sustain existing improvements and the new arrangements
will need to include this capacity.
— The private sector both corporately and
individually have been active supporters of the arts and heritage
over a long time. The extent to which this can be seen as a major
plank of investment in future business models is however questionable.
— Tax incentives along with increased public
recognition may improve the number and scale of private donations.
However donors would not respond well if their generosity resulted
in withdrawal of public subsidy.
MAIN RESPONSE
TO KEY
QUESTIONS:
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;
1.1 Both capital and revenue spend on arts
and heritage comes from a range of sources. Recent requirements
for in year savings and indicative savings for future years are
putting pressure on both capital development and future planning
and operations.
1.2 The in year spending cuts that have
been applied to date have been in two main areas:
1.2.1 Cuts to project funding both capital and
revenue which have been allocated to arts and heritage activity
but not formally contracted. This includes funding via the Northwest
Regional Development Agency (NWDA) which will have a significant
impact on the realisation of major cultural capital projects and
on the ability to match funding already secured or to be applied
for from Lottery distributors. Manchester's ability to stage and
attract major cultural events and exhibitions together with the
marketing of these to attract national and international visitors
and profile is critical to the city's tourism economy and international
image. These impacts are both cultural and economic. To date this
work has been supported by the NWDA.
1.2.2 Cuts to the revenue funding of arts and
heritage organisations and activities. These have been generated
through in year cuts applied to the NDPBs and to regeneration
funds via Area Based Grant which have been passed on to organisations,
many of which are small independent charities. The in year cuts
to date have been manageable, however predicted future reductions
will be far more damaging.
1.3 Over the last 10 years and alongside
a previous period of capital investment enabled by the National
Lottery, Manchester has seen a massive improvement in the quality,
scale and diversity of its cultural offer. This was accelerated
through successful delivery of the Commonwealth Games. The City
can now confidently claim to have world class orchestral, theatre
and museum provision and a rich ecology of practice across a wide
range of artform areas.
1.4 We have been tracking development over
this period and can demonstrate the visits to cultural and recreation
facilities reached in excess of 42 million in 2008-09, a 400%
increase since 2000-01, with 91% of residents report that they
use cultural and recreational facilities. Over 18,000 educational
visits and 25,000 employment opportunities are generated and tourisms
contribution to the economy reached £1,165 million in 2009-10
with over 6.5 million overnight visits to Manchester.
1.5 This development is under serious threat
if the indicative cuts are implemented. We have calculated the
annual investment in arts and heritage to be in the region of
£38.5 million pounds via NDPB (£14 million), local authority
(£10 million), central government (£6.5 million), university
(£4 million), other regional and sub regional public bodies
(£2.5 million) and other sources (£1.5 million). This
demonstrates the majority of existing funding is from public bodies
which will all be facing a 25-40% reduction over the next four
years. This will inevitably result in a minimum reduction of investment
in arts and heritage in the region of £10 million. Given
the relatively small scale of many arts and heritage organisations,
there is limited capacity to absorb cuts without significant impacts
for both artistic and education programmes. While there may be
scope for some restructure, the savings would not be achievable
soon enough to prevent long term damage to their delivery. It
is expected that a disproportionate negative impact will be experienced
in both the quality of artistic programming and ongoing work with
communities.
1.6 Local Government's own services and
its ability to grant aid others will also be seriously affected.
2. What arts organisations can do to work
more closely together in order to reduce duplication of effort
and to make economies of scale;
2.1 Arts organisations are already working
towards collaboration. Manchester can demonstrate best practice
in relation to its Museums where Renaissance in the Regions has
enabled joint working and mutual trust across the City's main
museums. This has resulted in joint marketing, particularly external
promotion to visitors; capacity building including awareness of
environmental impacts and shared working in the delivery of education
programmes. There is potential to further develop this collaboration
to achieve better value from investment and to generate some savings.
This can only be achieved if the commitment to Renaissance or
similar funding is sustained to enable this transition.
2.2 Manchester City Council and the Arts
Council as joint funders are working at a strategic level on ways
of enabling closer working between arts organisations and how
to develop intelligence about the wider ecology and interdependence
of activities. This could lead to a more robust approach to funding
and deliver better value in the long term. However a period of
transition is needed to safeguard the infrastructure and prevent
the loss of valuable knowledge and skills.
3. What level of public subsidy for the arts
and heritage is necessary and sustainable;
3.1 There is ample evidence of the impacts
of arts and heritage activities in a number of areas including
educational attainment aspiration and skills, community pride,
health and wellbeing as well as the obvious benefits to the economy.
Manchester has demonstrated that the arts and heritage assets
of a city are fundamental to economic growth. The city's recent
research into future talent attraction has indicated that the
existence of a vibrant cultural offer is a significant factor
in attracting and retaining talent. A sustainable arts and heritage
sector is made up of a number of layers of activity attracting
a mix of local, regional and national audiences and delivered
through a spectrum of individual artists and organisations.
3.2 Public funding is an essential part
of the mixed economy of many organisations if they are to continue
to invest in innovative work and public education. Both of the
activities are key to fuelling the tourism and the creative and
digital economy.
4. Whether the current system, and structure,
of funding distribution is the right one;
4.1 The current system, structure and funding
distribution demonstrates a high level of accountability and transparency
and has been reformed a number of times. Manchester would welcome
a more strategic approach to investment, aligned with the city's
stated Cultural Ambition. The moves to rationalise the range of
funders is a positive one, provided specialist expertise and important
investment programmes and professional standards are maintained.
4.2 There is also a need to introduce greater
flexibility so that new initiatives can establish while securing
long term investment in the fundamental building blocks and core
institutions.
5. What impact recent changes to the distribution
of National Lottery funds will have on arts and heritage organisations;
5.1 The intention to increase the Lottery
funds available to the arts and heritage is welcomed and will
require a review of funding aims and objectives to ensure that
grant regimes recognise the new economic environment and build
on good practice to date.
6. Whether the policy guidelines for National
Lottery funding need to be reviewed;
6.1 Lottery investment has transformed the
cultural landscape since the mid 1990s, both in terms of capital
and project investment. The quality and standards of the physical
environment need to be sustained through the opportunity for early
recipients to return for funds to refresh their buildings. Continued
work on ensuring access to the arts and heritage is also essential,
such as the exemplary work of the Young Roots programme.
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;
7.1 While the government has announced the
abolition of these organisations, it has not yet described how
or if the functions of these organisations will be placed with
other organisations.
7.2 The UK Film Council has supported the
network of local film offices which have helped to build the film
and television economy across the UK and have enabled areas of
the country to promote themselves on screen. Manchester wishes
to see this work continue, recognising the positive effect of
location filming on the local economy. The Film Council also distributes
lottery funds for film and supports independent film exhibition
and festivals. Independent cinema and film is an important part
of the arts and heritage offer and while it may not require a
separate funding body, the support for film production and presentation
should be sustained.
7.3 The MLA has performed an important role
in transforming local authority cultural provision across museums,
libraries and archives. It also sets and monitors professional
standards for the care and stewardship of the nation's heritage.
Its support for the development of regional museums through Renaissance
in the Regions has been hugely successful, and needs to be continued.
The MLA has also provided valuable advice and support for the
professionals working in the sector leading to improvements in
the curation and public access to our heritage. Sector specific
investment is essential to continue and sustain these improvements
and the new arrangements will need to include this capacity.
8. Whether businesses and philanthropists
can play a long-term role in funding arts at a national and local
level;
8.1 The private sector both corporately
and individually have been active supporters of the arts and heritage
over a long time. This is evidenced in the role that they play
in the governance of arts and heritage organisations, in sponsoring
programmes and participating in Friends and Patrons schemes. The
extent to which this can be seen as a major plank of investment
in future business models is however questionable. Outside London
there are limited numbers of high networth individuals and few
company head offices. While improvements could be made in relation
to tax incentives, including in life gifts of works of art to
public collections, these initiatives could only enhance and not
replace significant public investment.
9. Whether there need to be more Government
incentives to encourage private donations.
9.1 Tax incentives along with increased
public recognition may improve the number and scale of private
donations. However donors would not respond well if their generosity
resulted in withdrawal of public subsidy.
September 2010
| 
