Written evidence submitted by The Theatres
Trust (arts 166)
1. The Theatres Trust welcomes the opportunity
to comment on the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee Inquiry
and would be pleased to provide oral evidence to the Select Committee.
2. The Theatres Trust is an Advisory Arms
Length Body of the DCMS. We were established by The Theatres Trust
Act 1976 and The Theatres Trust (Scotland) Act 1978 "to promote
the better protection of theatres". These Acts apply to all
theatre buildings in England, Wales, and Scotland. The Trust's
15 trustees are appointed by the Secretary of State for Culture,
Olympics, Media and Sport and include trustees from England, Scotland,
Wales and Northern Ireland.
3. The Theatres Trust is a statutory consultee
in the planning system. Local authorities are required to consult
the Trust on planning applications which include "development
involving any land on which there is a theatre." The statutory
instruments setting out the consultation requirements are currently:
The Town & Country Planning (General Development Procedure)
Order 1995, Article 10, Para 5 and Regulation 25 of The Town and
Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland)
Regulations 2008, Schedule 5, paragraph 11. Theatres in Northern
Ireland are covered under an administrative agreement. The Trust
reports on its pre-application advice and planning application
advice annually to the Department of Communities and Local Government.
4. The Theatres Trust is therefore a good
example of an advisory body that works at local authority level
within the areas of responsibility of both the DCMS and DCLG.
We are often the only source of expert advice on theatre use,
design, conservation, property and planning matters available
to theatre operators, local authorities and official bodies. Given
the pressures on local authorities to reduce staffing capacity
in arts and cultural and planning departments, with many arts
and conservation posts having been downgraded or deleted, we have
been receiving an increased number of requests for our advice.
5. In its written ministerial statement
of the 26 July 2010 the DCMS proposed that The Theatres Trust
be declassified so it can act as an independent statutory advisory
body. The Trust has been told that The Theatres Trust Act and
The Theatres Trust (Scotland) Act will remain in force, ensuring
that The Trust's role continues. We have also been told that the
only change that will be made will be to transfer the responsibility
of appointment of the Trust's trustees from the Secretary of State
to the trustees of The Theatres Trust, thereby reducing administrative
time spent by the Department on our trustee appointments. Our
authority is vested in the Acts and in our role as a statutory
consultee and it is important that these continue as instruments
for the Trust to provide its advice and provide for the protection
of theatres, particularly when many theatres will be facing additional
pressures of cuts in public subsidy.
6. The Theatres Trust receives a £55,000
annual grant devolved for administrative purposes from the DCMS
to English Heritage in 1994. It is vital that this grant remains
as it is provided for the execution of our statutory work in England.
Given that this grant has remained on standstill since 1994 we
have already been managing annual inflationary reductions. Any
further cut in this grant would seriously compromise our ability
to deliver our work. It contributes directly towards the employment
of an RTPI qualified specialist theatre adviser enabling us to
deliver our statutory obligations to provide planning and heritage
advice. In 2010-11 this included 14 pre-applications, 104 planning
applications, 626 local authority Local Development Framework
consultations and 59 other consultations. The Adviser also considers
listed building consent applications and in 2010-11 these totalled
nine pre-applications and 60 listed building consent applications.
In addition the Adviser maintains a Theatre Buildings at Risk
register enabling us to establish those theatres most at risk.
7. Whilst not a statutory consultee on listed
building applications, recognition of our expertise in this area
by local authorities means we are considered an important consultee.
Our expertise was also noted in relation to the Heritage Protection
Review in 2008. The Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee
stated "Recommendation Four: [The Select Committee] recommend[s]
that the Government ensures that the role of statutory consultees
such as the Theatres Trust is properly incorporated into the heritage
protection reforms in addition to their existing role in the planning
system." The DCMS released its response to recommendations
from the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee on the Draft
Heritage Protection Bill on 20 October 2008. The Trust was referenced
in on page 11, stating "31. The Government has welcomed comments
received from organisations that have put forward a case for their
greater involvement in the heritage protection system. In the
case of the Theatres Trust, DCMS has been constructively engaged
with them and we agree that there is scope for amendments to the
Bill to enable the Theatres Trust to participate more fully in
the heritage protection system. For example, a number of provisions
will be redrafted to ensure that the Theatres Trust is capable
of being included as a statutory consultee, in relation to processes
and decisions affecting theatre buildings."
8. We are working with civil servants at
the DCMS on our declassification, but we are yet to receive any
written notification of the timetable and the process. We are
working to ensure that any changes in our relationship to the
DCMS do not impact negatively on our capacity to promote the better
protection of theatres on behalf of the nation, particularly at
a time when many more theatres in the UK will be facing the prospect
of managing their assets on diminishing levels of public subsidy.
Please also find attached our wider response
to the Committee's specific questions [not printed].
9. 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
9.1 Subsidised theatres rely upon a range
of different funding streams for capital and revenue support including
the Arts Council, local Government, European Funding, Government
regeneration funding (previously through the Regional Development
Agencies and we anticipate in the future through Local Enterprise
Partnerships), Arts Lottery and Heritage Lottery. Our concerns
lie in the rate of the implementation of the cuts, given that
Government departments, Arts Council and local Government will
be looking to make savings quickly. Theatres operate on a fine
financial balance and should be given time to manage any cuts
and seek alternative income to offset any reductions in subsidy
and capital commitments. A sudden squeeze on all these funding
streams will have an impact upon the ability of theatres to function
effectively on a day-to-day basis, to maintain their buildings,
and to implement already planned capital improvements, and so
ensure they continue to be able to maintain a high quality of
service and operate sustainably for the long term.
9.2 In planning for spending cuts, arms
length bodies and local authorities are already making provisions
for reducing staffing levels and the cost of providing services
in the areas of arts and culture, planning and conservation. They
are looking at options for cutting back staff, combining service
functions with other arms length bodies and neighbouring authorities,
and establishing trusts or outsourcing to deliver services. The
impact of this disruption on theatres cannot be underestimated
and should be managed to ensure it does not cause any additional
financial stress.
9.3 Theatre buildings not in theatre use
are also at greater risk. The Trust is already concerned at the
number of theatre buildings, particularly in the north of England,
which are facing closure and demolition by Local Authorities that
feel unwilling or unable to maintain them. The Palace Theatre
in Nelson was demolished earlier this year, while North Tyneside
Council is planning to spend a considerable sum demolishing the
Borough Theatre, Wallsend and redeveloping it for commercial and
residential uses, despite the efforts of local residents to save
the building. The Council specifically cited reductions in public
sector funding as reasons why they refused to support local residents'
attempts to save the building, considering their plans financially
unsustainable. The Trust fears that these represent the start
of another spate of losses of theatre buildings in towns which
already have little else in the way of cultural facilities.
9.4 Regional theatres are particularly vulnerable
to reductions in Government support since they tend to be in areas
which lack the profile or means to attract significant levels
of business or philanthropic support, resulting in large areas
of the country which are denied access to live professional theatre
and performances. Regional theatres are vital components of the
wider theatre ecology, enabling practitioners to develop their
skills and inspiring the next generation and their loss has an
impact throughout the sector.
10. What arts organisations can do to work
more closely together in order to reduce duplication of effort
and to make economies of scale
10.1 Theatre owners and operators will face
many challenges to maintain their competitiveness and continue
to attract audiences over the next few years. Whilst there may
be opportunities to work more closely with neighbouring theatres
(in some areas) to promote productions jointly to audiences and
to work on joint programming, this can often take as much time
as working alone.
10.2 There may well be opportunities for
theatre organisations to merge and for local authority-owned theatres
to be devolved to trusts, but each of these options will need
to be carefully examined and managed. This includes a commitment
to investing resources in feasibility work to ensure that solutions
do indeed provide a more economically viable and sustainable solution
and don't just transfer financial responsibilities which require
similar levels of subsidy.
11. What level of public subsidy for the
arts and heritage is necessary and sustainable
11.1 Theatres operate in a mixed economy,
attracting earned income and subsidy to present and produce a
range of work for different audiences. Most public subsidy that
theatres attract is targeted towards public benefit, providing
access to theatre experiences for those in society less able to
afford to pay or those that do not have the family or other support
that encourages participation in the arts. Protecting subsidy
that goes towards providing those least able to access the arts
with the opportunity to do so is necessary.
11.2 For example, larger receiving regional
theatres are able to attract more income from the box office because
of their size. In many of these theatres the levels of public
subsidy are often lower, but targeted to providing use of the
theatre by community groups who would not have the funds to afford
commercial hire rates, or towards providing education programmes
where theatres work with local youth services, social services
and schools to create opportunities for young and other disadvantaged
groups to access theatre experiences.
11.3 In smaller theatres, their smaller
seating capacity seriously compromises their ability to earn income.
They are often their local communities' only access to the arts
and culture, and in many places these communities are not wealthy.
Subsidy that is directed towards producing and promoting work
by small scale theatres that work closely with their local communities
should be prioritised.
12. What impact recent changes to the distribution
of National Lottery funds will have on arts and heritage organisations
12.1 Theatres across the UK are still in
need of a wide-reaching and coherent programme of capital investment
to enable them to upgrade the basic fabric of their buildings
to make them more accessible and financially viable, to improve
their environmental efficiency, to increase audiences and help
revitalise our tourism industry, and to act as a catalyst for
urban regeneration. While the Heritage Lottery Fund has pursued
a sustained and effective programme of investment in theatres,
the same unfortunately has not been the case with Arts Council
England Lottery funds in the last 10 years. If theatres are to
engage with new audiences and continue to give life to town and
city centres across the UK, it is essential that their capital
needs are addressed.
12.2 While grants from the Heritage Lottery
have helped to reinvigorate a number of theatres such as the Hackney
Empire and London Coliseum, many theatres do not qualify as heritage
assets in their own right, and the share of Arts Council funding
going towards theatre buildings has declined dramatically after
the first five years of the Lottery. There has also been an increasing
divide growing between the experience of theatres in the commercial
and in the subsidised sector.
12.3 The Theatres Trust welcomes the intention
to return the Lottery shares for arts, heritage and sport to the
level originally intended when the Lottery was set up. If ticket
sales remain at their current levels, this should translate into
an extra £50 million a year each for arts and heritage. The
original "good causes" of arts and heritage have seen
a diminution in the funds available for their activities not only
from the reduction in Lottery shares in 1997 but also in the redirection
of significant Heritage and Arts Council Lottery money to fund
the Olympics.
12.4 However, we are also concerned that
such re-distribution should not be seen as mitigation for wider
cuts in government funding of arts and heritage projects. While
we recognise the need to restore integrity to the public finances,
we are anxious that the core principle of "additionality"
in regard to Lottery funding is not compromised. One of the primary
intentions for the Lottery, as the impact assessment document
makes clear, was to provide funds for capital projects which the
Government was not in a position to fund directly and to ensure
that the country's cultural infrastructure was properly restored,
maintained and improved. The value of Lottery funding will be
undermined if it is used instead as a substitute for core Government
spending.
13. Whether the policy guidelines for National
Lottery funding need to be reviewed
13.1 The Theatres Trust would welcome a
commitment to an increased level of Lottery funding going towards
capital projects for theatres. One of the primary intentions for
the Lottery was to provide funds for capital projects which the
Government was not in a position to fund directly and to ensure
that the country's cultural infrastructure was properly restored,
maintained and improved.
13.2 There are three areas that we would
like to see considered further in the return of the Lottery to
its original levels:
13.2 (a) A commitment to an increased level
of Lottery funding going towards capital projects for theatres,
particularly where these support economic and environmental sustainability,
address issues related to climate change, and deliver aspirations
of locally led initiatives to deliver the Big Society. Many theatres
are still to benefit from Arts Lottery funds, which have tended
only to focus on organisations occupying theatres that are already
financially supported by the Arts Council as revenue or regularly
funded clients. There are many theatres that operate in the amateur
and voluntary sectors, or operate solely as receiving venues,
in education and commercial sectors that provide public benefit
and have been unable to access Arts Lottery funding for capital
projects. The economic realities of theatre ownership are such
that the return on capital invested is low in normal commercial
terms, and far too low to support the sort of modernisation that
is now needed. This has widened the gap between the standards
the public experience in the subsidised and commercial sector.
13.2 (b) A commitment to capitalisation
and the seed funding of endowments that can support the long term
operational and maintenance needs, and therefore viability, of
theatre buildings. For example, The Theatres Trust is keen to
establish such an endowment to build its Theatre Protection Fund
which would enable us to provide assistance to secure the future
of theatre buildings.
13.2 (c) A recognition of the important
leverage role that capital Lottery funds play in the economic,
social and environmental regeneration of an area and that it has
a complementary role to play in supporting theatre capital projects
along with European and UK-wide enterprise and regeneration funds.
The DCMS and the Lottery we feel therefore has a role to ensure
that other Government Departments are aware of the implications
on the Lottery of reducing capital regeneration funds.
14. 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
14.1 In its written ministerial statement
of the 26 July 2010 the DCMS proposed that The Theatres Trust
be declassified so it can act as an independent statutory advisory
body. The Trust has been told that The Theatres Trust Act and
The Theatres Trust (Scotland) Act will remain in force, ensuring
that The Trust's role continues. We have also been told that the
only change that will be made will be to transfer the responsibility
of appointment of the Trust's trustees from the Secretary of State
to the trustees of The Theatres Trust, thereby reducing administrative
time spent by the department on our trustee appointments. Our
authority is vested in the Acts and in our role as a statutory
consultee, and it is important that these continue as instruments
for the Trust to provide its advice and provide for the protection
of theatres, particularly when many theatres will be facing additional
pressures of cuts in public subsidy.
14.2 The Theatres Trust welcomes the proposal
by DCMS that we should be declassified to become an independent
statutory advisory body. We anticipate that this will result in
a saving of administrative time which will enable us to focus
on promoting the better protection of theatres. We would welcome
an endorsement by Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee of
the Trust's independent statutory advisory role.
14.3 Our advice has been instrumental in
securing the future of theatres, scrutinising the suitability
of works to theatres, ensuring that new theatres are fit for purpose
and campaigning for the retention of theatres under threat. Our
specialist advice to Local Authorities through the planning system
is particularly vital at a time when they may be employing fewer
numbers of planning and conservation officers. It is therefore
imperative that the Trust maintains its role as a statutory advisor.
14.4 We are working with civil servants
at the DCMS on our declassification, but we are yet to receive
any written notification of the timetable and the process. We
are working to ensure that any changes in our relationship to
the DCMS do not impact negatively on our capacity to promote the
better protection of theatres on behalf of the nation, particularly
at a time when many more theatres in the UK will be facing the
prospect of managing their assets on diminishing levels of public
subsidy.
14.5 The Theatres Trust receives a £55,000
annual grant devolved for administrative purposes from the DCMS
to English Heritage in 1994. It is vital that this grant remains
as it is provided for the execution of our statutory work in England.
Given that this grant has remained on standstill since 1994 we
have already been managing annual inflationary reductions. Any
further cut in this grant would seriously compromise our ability
to deliver our work. We would welcome an endorsement by the Culture,
Media and Sport Select Committee that our grant should continue
at current levels.
15. Whether businesses and philanthropists
can play a long-term role in funding arts at a national and local
level
15.1 There needs to be a clearer understanding
of why businesses and philanthropists invest in theatres and how
they expect to benefit, in order to decide how extensive a role
their support could play in the sector as a whole. Larger corporations
are generally more likely to invest in high profile theatres and
smaller groups or regional theatres are less able to attract significant
levels of private investment, especially in areas of the country
which are economically struggling.
15.2 Furthermore, private funding can be
inconsistent and increase the uncertainty of an already volatile
sector. The experience of many arts organisations in New York
has been that private investment can evaporate in times of economic
uncertainty, leaving them in severe difficulties. The impact of
the recession last year saw many sponsors drift away from the
arts. In some cases the Arts Council's Sustain funding was able
to fill the gap left, but this was a one-off injection of funds.
15.3 The Trust would be concerned at attempts
to imitate too closely the American model of arts funding, without
an appreciation of the many different factors which underpin it
and which are not replicated in the UK, such as tax incentives,
more independent regions and a different attitude to the role
of central Government. There is also widespread dissatisfaction
among American theatre practitioners with a system of private
philanthropy which they feel does not deliver the depth or breadth
of artistic excellence enjoyed in Europe. Spoken drama in London's
West End and on New York's Broadway is now dominated by productions
developed in the UK subsidised theatre sector.
15.4 Theatres already make huge efforts
to attract business and private donations and it is uncertain
how much more scope there is for greater involvement of the private
sector without further tax incentives also being on offer.
16. Whether there need to be more Government
incentives to encourage private donations
16.1 The existing system of Gift Aid is
an essential fundraising element of many theatres that have charitable
status. The Theatres Trust would welcome any proposals that strengthen
the Gift Aid system, make it easier to claim, and which make it
more attractive to the individual who is interested in giving.
September 2010
| 
