Written evidence submitted by the Musicians'
Union (arts 104)
1. The Musicians' Union (MU) welcomes the
opportunity to respond to the Culture, Media and Sport Select
Committee's inquiry into the funding of the Arts and Heritage.
2. We represent over 30,000 musicians working
in all genres of music. As well as negotiating on behalf of our
members with all the major employers in the industry, we also
offer a range of services tailored for the self-employed by providing
assistance for professional and student musicians of all ages.
3. We are responding to this consultation
in order to protect funding for the arts, especially in the context
of the widespread cuts that are already being put into place and
which are already impacting on our members.
4. The arts are vitally important to the
UK's economy. The UK has the largest cultural economy in the world
relative to GDP, and every £1 invested in culture produces
£2. Two thirds of the adult population in the UK enjoy the
arts and music on its own contributes nearly £5 billion to
the UK economy.
5. Between 1997 and 2006 the creative economy
grew faster than any other sector, accounting for 2 million jobs
and £16.6 billion of exports in 2007. Arts and culture are
also central to tourism in the UK: this was worth £86 billion
in 2007—3.7% of GDP—and directly employed 1.4 million
people. Inbound tourism is a vital export earner for the UK economy,
worth £16.3 billion to the UK economy in 2008.
6. At a time when our general economy is
struggling, it seems illogical to cut spending and therefore cause
permanent damage to the arts—which is one area that has
consistently maintained growth.
7. In addition, the cultural sector has
made a real contribution to the country's social and economic
recovery through offering work, learning, training and social
engagement. The arts represent the creative future on which Britain's
economy depends.
8. And yet the new coalition Government
has already asked Arts Council England (ACE) to make cuts of £19
million to its budget and the upcoming Comprehensive Spending
Review could force DCMS to make cuts of more than 25% to its budget.
If cuts of 25% or more are passed on to ACE, jobs in the creative
sector will undoubtedly be at risk.
9. Any such cuts to such a small budget
would cause disproportionate damage to organisations and creators.
They will have a real impact on the frontline and will cost far
more that the extremely small sums they save government overall.
This is because cuts in local authority funding, a reduction in
private sector support and escalating running costs will create
the "perfect storm" for many successful organisations
that operate on the mixed economy model.
10. Any cuts that do take place need to
be spread intelligently over four years so that they can be managed
in the best way. Any dramatic cut in funding in 2011-12 will hit
organisations hardest in the Olympics year and it will take many
years to recover.
11. Indeed, with the Olympics coming up
in 2012, it is essential that Britain's cultural institutions
and attractions continue to deliver the quality and range of programmes
that are admired across the world. In order for this to happen,
there must be continued investment in the arts. The cultural budget
is tiny compared to other departments—it represents only
1% of the NHS budget.
12. The arts sector does, however, recognise
the need to contribute to the economic recovery—and has
already sustained significant cuts (£112.5 million of Arts
Council Lottery funding has been diverted to the Olympics, in
addition to the in-year Grant-in-aid cuts). However, there is
a point at which the operating models of many organisations will
have to be radically reappraised, and some will not have that
option. There is a tipping point of 10-15% for most arts organisations.
13. For contracted organisations, cuts quickly
translate into a reduction in contracted workforce. Thanks to
significant Stabilisation investment and other organisational
development support these organisations have finally reached a
point where they have sustainable business models, after many
years of instability. Upsetting these finely balanced models has
potential to tip these organisations back into crisis.
14. For the majority of organisations, cuts
will force a reduced programme of work, which translates directly
into a loss of jobs in a mainly freelance workforce. Cuts to all
organisations will also threaten much of their social and community
work, which benefits the wider society.
15. If the creative sectors must make cuts,
the main priority must be to protect jobs. We believe that it
would be preferable for ACE to rein in artistic ambition and the
funding of new projects in the short term in order to maintain
frontline services and jobs for the future.
16. The arts will undoubtedly have to get
better at new ways of doing things—for example, making philanthropic
giving much more effective for the arts. However, this cannot
be done overnight and changes and incentives will have to be put
in place.
17. Although philanthropy can perhaps play
a bigger part in arts funding in future, it would be irresponsible
to remove secure public funding in its favour. The example of
America, where a number of orchestras and other arts organisations
collapsed when donations and legacies lost value, should serve
as a warning to us. We believe that the current system of arts
funding is amongst the best in the world and that it should be
protected at all costs.
18. The Arts Council provides as fair and
as direct a method of funding as is possible—any delegation
to other bodies would create additional layers of artistic subjectivity
which would be unhelpful to overall levels of funding in the sector.
19. We could list hundreds of organisations
which rely on the Arts Council for funding. Orchestras, for example,
rely on the Arts Council grants and most would fold immediately
if this money was withdrawn or, in some cases, even reduced. If
we want the orchestral sector to continue to thrive and be internationally
competitive as it undoubtedly is at the moment, arts funding must
be protected.
20. We would welcome the opportunity to
give oral evidence to the Committee if required.
September 2010
| 
