Written evidence submitted by Jonathan
Platt (arts 102)
Jonathan Platt B.A., M.Soc.Sci., FMA writes
in his own capacity as a museum professional working in Lincolnshire.
1. SUMMARY
1.1 Spending cuts have already had a significant
impact on museum and heritage services in Lincolnshire, with
reduced hours and now the proposed closure of three museums.
1.2 Organisations are increasingly working
together to collaborate on both strategic and operational matters.
Examples include the Lincolnshire One project for arts venues
and the development of a Cultural Strategy for Lincolnshire, County
Arts Strategy and County Sports Strategy.
1.3 Public subsidy is necessary for arts
and heritage organisations.
1.4 The current systems for the distribution
of government funding are varied and complex. Since 2009 MLA's
administration of the excellent Renaissance Programme has become
increasingly bureaucratic, cumbersome and far less efficient.
1.5 The key functions of MLA should continue
to be delivered by government, but in the absence of a sector
lead body how will government engage with the sector beyond 2012?
1.6 Looking to businesses and philanthropists
to play a long term role in funding the arts may work in London,
but it will not work in the regions which are in danger of becoming
cultural deserts.
1.7 The development of tax incentives to
encourage private donations are welcome, but will principally
benefit London based institutions.
2. EFFECT OF
RECENT AND
FUTURE SPENDING
CUTS
2.1 The impact of recent spending cuts has
been to create pay and recruitment freezes in the arts and heritage
sectors. This has reduced capacity to deliver and has directly
affected front line services. For example, Lincolnshire County
Council's museum sites have closed at 4pm since 1 May 2008.
2.2 Future spending cuts have already led
to the announcement that the County Council will be unable to
operate the following:
— Church Farm Museum, Skegness from 1 November
2010;
— Grantham Museum from 31 March 2011; and
— Stamford Museum from 30 June 2011.
2.3 At the County Council's sites that are
remaining open admission charges have been increased above inflation
in 2010. For example, at Lincoln Castle, Gainsborough Old Hall
and the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight Visitor Centre adult
admission prices were increased from £4.10 to £5.00
from 1 April 2010. Further above inflation price increases are
likely to occur from 1 April 2011. Whilst in the short term this
does not seem to have had a detrimental effect on numbers attending,
it is likely to do so in the future.
3. WHAT CAN
ARTS ORGANISATIONS
DO TO
WORK MORE
CLOSELY TOGETHER?
3.1 In Lincolnshire the Arts Council have
supported the development of the Lincolnshire One project under
their Organisational Development Thrive Programme. This has brought
together many of the local authority arts venues in the county
such they cooperate more on marketing, promotion, audience development
and arts development. During 2009 they created a county wide Arts
Strategy This is Art!.
3.2 Similarly, in 2009 Lincolnshire's eight
local authorities came together to write a joint Cultural Strategy
Promote, Provide Participate!
3.3 Both documents followed hard on the
heals of the 2008 Lincolnshire-wide Sports Strategy Loving Sport,
Living Life: A Strategy for Lincolnshire to 2012 and beyond.
3.4 All three documents set a strategic
direction for arts, sports and cultural organisations to go in,
but funding cuts will undoubtedly reduce capacity to deliver.
4. WHAT LEVEL
OF PUBLIC
SUBSIDY FOR
ARTS AND
HERITAGE IS
NECESSARY?
4.1 In 2008-09 Lincolnshire County Council's
heritage service generated 38% of its turnover from admissions,
trading, grants etc. This suggests that it needed 62% "subsidy"
from the taxpayers of Lincolnshire to operate as it is.
4.2 Of the 38%, 6.6% came from the national
Renaissance programme which is currently under review.
4.3 Reductions in this level of "subsidy"
will directly reduce the size, scale and nature of the service.
They are doing so already.
5. IS THE
CURRENT SYSTEM,
AND STRUCTURE
OF FUNDING
DISTRIBUTION THE
RIGHT ONE?
5.1 The current system is complex and in
many respects cumbersome. Lincolnshire's Heritage Service receives
funding from the County Council, English Heritage, the Arts Council
and Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. In the past it has
also secured grant funding from the East Midlands Development
Agency and Government Office for the East Midlands. All have different
systems, criteria and in some cases even financial years. This
makes accounting and administration overly complex.
5.2 Since April 2009 the administration
of the excellent Renaissance programme in England by the Museums,
Libraries and Archive's Council has become more and more bureaucratic
and cumbersome. Prior to April 2009 MLA had a single funding agreement
with Leicester City Council as the accountable body for the programme
in the East Midlands. Partner services (Lincolnshire, Leicestershire,
Derby City, Nottingham City and Northampton Borough) worked with
Leicester City to create a unified regional programme. Leicester
distributed the funding through agreements with partner services
such as Lincolnshire County Council's Heritage Service. Leicester
also collated the statistical and financial information required
by MLA. Since April 2009 MLA has insisted on direct agreements
with five partner services including Lincolnshire and still requires
Leicester City to collate information. Five agreements are now
required, increasing bureaucracy both for MLA and partner services.
Quarterly returns now have to be submitted to both MLA and Leicester
City and what was once a regional programme is increasingly becoming
a series of county or city wide schemes.
6. IMPACT OF
LOTTERY CHANGES
ON ARTS
AND HERITAGE
ORGANISATIONS?
6.1 No comment.
7. NEED TO
REVIEW NATIONAL
LOTTERY POLICY
GUIDELINES?
7.1 No comment.
8. IMPACT OF
ABOLITION OF
THE MUSEUMS,
LIBRARIES AND
ARCHIVES COUNCIL?
8.1 The key functions of the MLA should
continue:
— Acceptance in Lieu scheme—via the
Treasury;
— National Security Adviser Scheme and
Museum Accreditation—via The Collections Trust;
— Renaissance—via Department for
Culture, Media and Sport or possibly the Arts Council using its
established Regularly Funded Organisations (RFO) model.
8.2 Of key concern is whether the museums,
libraries and archives sector will continue to be heard by government
after MLA ceases to exist in 2012.
9. WHETHER BUSINESSES
AND PHILANTHROPISTS
CAN PLAY
A LONG
TERM ROLE
IN FUNDING
ARTS AT
A NATIONAL
AND LOCAL
LEVEL
9.1 From 2000 to 2005 I was Project Director
for the creation of the creation of a new City and County Museum
for Lincoln and Lincolnshire. The scheme cost over £12 million.
In spite of strenuous attempts to secure private sector funding
from companies and organisations only £100,000 (0.8%) came
from businesses, and less than £11,000 from private individuals.
The rest came from local authorities, grants, government agencies
and charities. Based on this experience I would suggest that only
national organisations based in London will benefit from the generosity
of businesses and philanthropists. If the regions are left to
rely on these sources of income they will become cultural deserts.
10. GOVERNMENT
INCENTIVES TO
ENCOURAGE PRIVATE
DONATIONS
10.1 Such incentives would be most welcome,
but they are only likely to benefit those national organisations
based in London.
September 2010
| 
