GPS Culture. A New Destination for the Arts

Transcription

1 GPS Culture A New Destinatin fr the Arts Between a RCC and a Hard Place Reflectins, Recmmendatins and Cnclusin Christpher Grdn David Pwell Peter Stark 25 February

2 GPS Culture A New Destinatin fr the Arts Between a RCC and a Hard Place Prlgue The title f this reprt indicates that we sense we have cmpleted a cycle f wrk but als that we are under n illusins abut the scale f challenges that will face the arts in the next five years. On the ther hand we retain ptimism fr the future. This derives frm many surces including ur interactin with energetic and ingenius artists, prducers and civic leaders acrss the cuntry, the vibrancy and diversity f English sciety, and the perspective that cmes frm ur lng histry and ur varied internatinal wrk. At the start f ur careers in the late 1960s we built ur arts practices with the funding structures and arts training and supprt that were available at the time, natinally and lcally a tiny fractin f what is still available. Over frty years n, we firmly believe that the energy and cmmitment f artists and cmmunities t engage in generus cllabratins with ther agencies, institutins and businesses can still create new pprtunities fr themselves, their cmmunities, their regins and the cuntry as a whle. Why did we undertake the wrk? Early in 2013, we reaffirmed ur cmmitment t the rle that the arts culd play within ur wider cultural and spiritual life, within sciety and within the ecnmy. We shared ur belief that this culd best be achieved in a cuntry that nurtured its natinal capital alngside a range f majr centres f cultural prductin and presentatin in ther and equally valued parts f England at the same time as it ensured as even as pssible a spread f pprtunities fr all cmmunities and their citizens t participate in, and enjy, a rich creative life lcally. What we fund thrugh ur research was an England with a damagingly centralised pattern f determinatin n public funding fr culture and ne that cncentrated bth prvisin and decisin-making in the capital city. As in s many ther areas f England s public life, Lndn had becme dangerusly ver dminant. In a time f austerity and majr reductins in public funding fr the arts, resurces fr prductin and presentatin were being prtected in the capital and in the largest scale f rganisatin at 2

3 the expense f the regins, f smaller cmpanies and f prgrammes fr educatinal, scial and ecnmic develpment. Of even greater cncern was the silence f thse that were funded n the plicy, prgrammes and practices f their funders. They appeared t have lst their independence and their vices. A triennial funding regime and the lss f bth lcal and specialist knwledge within the funders had intrduced unprecedented levels f uncertainty even fear int the client/funder relatinship. What was said in private was ften at dds with public utterance where there was any. Nwhere was this mre evident than in the lack f public debate in the arts abut the selfinterested abandnment f the principle that Lttery funding shuld be additinal t grant-inaid, nt substitute fr it. This vluntarily prvided funding is derived disprprtinately frm the prest in sciety, sme f the least likely t be engaged in the arts. As mandated by specific Lttery directins, it was frm the utset recgnised as ethically different frm general taxatinsurced revenue. It was t prvide fr new and additinal activity, with a very substantial prprtin f that new activity targeted at the mst disadvantaged cmmunities and thse currently least engaged. Simultaneusly, thse same cmmunities have been the mst disadvantaged in their pprtunities fr access t the arts and culture lcally by reductins in funding fr lcal gvernment. There was silence and inactin at the centre and acrss the sectr n the cnsequences f austerity that has led t the lss f lcal infrastructure finance, facilities and expertise fr the arts and culture. 3

4 Research cnclusins a summary Rebalancing ur Cultural Capital (The RCC Reprt) As a great glbal city and the natinal capital, Lndn will and shuld cntinue t receive a higher allcatin f natinal funding fr the arts and culture than its ppulatin size alne wuld call fr. Hwever, at least tw thirds f the UK ppulatin lives beynd cmfrtable cultural cmmuting distance f the capital. These taxpayers and their families are bliged t pay a premium f hundreds f punds befre they can access the free galleries r subsidised (r unsubsidised) perfrmances in the capital. Natinal cultural plicy has t recgnise this fundamental reality. At the mment taxpayers funding fr the arts and culture by the DCMS directly and Arts Cuncil England prvides circa 70 per head t everybdy resident in Lndn, against 5 per head t thse elsewhere in the cuntry. At 14: 1, that rati is indefensible. Beynd this, 82% f private sectr funding fr the arts is given t Lndn-based rganisatins. Lndn audiences als have access t a cmmercial cultural sectr largely sustained by internatinal turists wh als cmprise a very significant prprtin f the visitrs t majr publicly subsidised cultural institutins. Lndn s Mayralty basts that the capital s culture and heritage assets are respnsible fr attracting 80% f the 16.8 millin internatinal turists wh visited in 2013, with estimated spend very largely within Lndn in the summer mnths alne f 3.3 billin. Successive gvernments and Arts Cuncils fr the past 60 years have argued that new mney is needed t imprve funding t the regins in rder nt t damage the capital. Over the past 20 years Arts Cuncil England has had stewardship f 3.5 billin f precisely such new funding fr the arts frm the Natinal Lttery, but it has still chsen t spend that mney in a rati f 4:1 in favur f the capital. That is wrng Plicy fr the Lttery, Arts and Cmmunity in England (The PLACE Reprt) Successive gvernments have repeatedly reaffirmed supprt fr the principle f additinality in the use f Lttery funds that Lttery funds shuld be directed t new and additinal activity

5 and must nt be used t substitute fr taxatin-based funding. In additin, the DCMS in 2007 issued directins t all Lttery distributrs that they shall take int accunt inter alia: the need t increase access and participatin fr thse wh d nt currently benefit frm the cultural pprtunities available in England; the need t fster lcal cmmunity initiatives which bring peple tgether, enrich the public realm and strengthen cmmunity spirit; the need t supprt vlunteering and participatin in the arts and cmmunity arts; the need t invlve the public and lcal cmmunities in making plicies, setting pririties and distributing mney; the desirability f ensuring equality f pprtunity, f reducing ecnmic and scial deprivatin and ensuring that all areas f England have access t the mney distributed. Lttery distributing bdies fr Sprt and Heritage have clearly taken care t cmply with these directins. Arts Cuncil England appears t have chsen and been allwed t ignre them in bth principle and practice. This, despite recent Gambling Cmmissin research cnfirming again the wide reginal and class variatins in purchase f Lttery prducts, and Camelt s cntinued emphasis in its marketing n the prvisin f benefit t gd causes right acrss the cuntry where yu live. Only 17% f Lcal Authrity areas (12% f Parliamentary Cnstituencies) have received mre back frm the Arts Lttery than they have cntributed per capita. Lttery funding has massively benefited areas f the cuntry where the ppulatin is already mst engaged with the arts: In the 10% f lcal authrity areas (33) where peple are least engaged with the arts the ttal receipt f Arts Lttery funding since 1995 is 288 millin, against a cntributin frm Lttery players f 395 millin a deficit f 107 millin. In the 10% f lcal authrity areas where peple are the heaviest users f the arts, the ttal Arts Lttery funding received is billin in the same perid, prducing a surplus a net benefit against funds cntributed f ver 1 billin. Furthermre ACE Lttery funding has increasingly been cncentrated n arts rganisatins already in receipt f the largest shares f public and private funding. The five largest f these rganisatins have received mre f the new Lttery grants mney allcated t ACE than has been available, ver the same 18-year perid, t the 10% f lcal authrity areas where ppulatins have the least engagement with the arts. 5

6 In this way the Arts Lttery funding surced disprprtinately frm sme f the prest in sciety is being used t furnish additinal benefits fr sme f the mst privileged thse living within reach f the mst heavily subsidised rganisatins and able t affrd the cst f using them mst ften. At the same time lcal cultural infrastructure and the pprtunities it affrds fr active participatin in the arts where the arts deliver their cntributin t individual and cmmunity wellbeing is under the severest threat frm reductins in lcal gvernment funding. Hard Facts t Swallw Cnsidering the arts (i.e. excluding the new earmarked museums expenditure) and strictly cmparing like with like, ur analysis is unable t substantiate the claims made by Arts Cuncil England that: funding f the Natinal Prtfli in Lndn has mved frm 51% t 47% f the ttal; there is a current trend f 60% f grant-in-aid investment utside Lndn, r that there is a current trend f 70% f Natinal Lttery investment utside Lndn. During the three years f Arts Cuncil England s investment plans the imbalance between natinal funding fr the arts in Lndn and in the rest f the cuntry will wrsen. The Arts Cuncil will have stewardship f funds t supprt the arts in England directly f 1,589 millin (excluding perating csts f ver 100 millin) prvided by taxpayers and lttery players frm acrss the whle f the cuntry; 689 millin (43.4%) f this will be invested in the arts in Lndn at per head f ppulatin (php) as against 900 millin in the rest f the cuntry at php. In its publicatin This England (February 2014), Arts Cuncil England states a clear psitin that it wuld nly be able t strengthen reginal prvisin as a cnsequence f ur grant-in-aid cuts being restred. In all the likely circumstances, that is a further cmmitment t indefinite delay. The Arts Cuncil has als blatantly breached the spirit and letter f the principle f additinality, and the Lttery Directins, by substituting Arts Lttery funding fr the revenue grant-in-aid supprt f majr pera and ballet cmpanies. At the same time its flagship prgramme t address the Lttery Directins and fcus n areas 6

7 f least engagement with the arts in the cuntry, Creative Peple and Places (allcated nly 4% f available Lttery funds in the current three-year budget), has had its budget fr the next three years reduced by 46%. Our analysis f the strategic plans and budgets led us t cnclude that the Arts Cuncil cntinued t demnstrate a systemic inability t refrm itself withut external interventin. The frces f custm, practice and vested interest were just t strng. The Select Cmmittee In January 2014 the Huse f Cmmns Culture Media and Sprt Select Cmmittee annunced its Inquiry int The Wrk f Arts Cuncil England. The Inquiry s terms f reference directly acknwledged the RCC reprt and its wide public impact. The calling f the Inquiry reflected RCC s cntributry rle in creating this debate and in placing uncmfrtable evidence n the table. As Lrd Bragg had said f RCC n its launch: This reprt is timely, urgent and damning f an increasingly centralised funding prcess. Lndn is simply eating up the resurces, which are limited, and is therefre starving the rest f the cuntry. This is wrng, shrt-sighted and undubtedly unfair. I think it is time that the rest f England fught back. The Select Cmmittee s reprt, published in Nvember 2014, embdied much f ur evidence and argument. GPS Culture was asked t prvide additinal analysis and presented evidence in persn. The Select Cmmittee gave supprt t ur research and analysis, acknwledging and cmprehensively referencing ur three reprts RCC, PLACE and Hard Facts t Swallw and many f ur recmmendatins. The Cmmittee s imprtant reprt, the mst critical and prgressive Parliamentary review f the Arts Cuncil and its funding prgrammes since 1982, unequivcally sets ut fr the arts sectr and lcal, reginal and natinal gvernment the urgency f rebalancing the natinal arts budgets in England and the pprtunities t d s. 1] The need fr a cmprehensive gvernment plicy fr the arts In the cntext f the cultural, scial and ecnmic imprtance f the arts t the whle cuntry, and given the Arts Cuncil s central rle in their prmtin, there is acceptance f the need fr external interventin by gvernment t secure thse functins f public supprt in the plicies and pririties f the Cuncil. (Reprt Recmmendatins and numbers are quted in the text belw.) 1. A strategic directin fr the Arts Cuncil wuld best be set by a clear verall plicy statement by the Gvernment. We recmmend that the Gvernment prduces and publishes a cmprehensive arts plicy. 7

8 2] The need fr urgency in rebalancing funding between Lndn and the regins In advance f any such a plicy being in place, and with clarity and emphasis, the Cmmittee cncludes that the Arts Cuncil shuld address the issues f imbalance with greater urgency and it endrses a mechanism t achieve this withut threatening Lndn s wrld status as a cultural centre by limiting Lndn s prprtin f Arts Lttery funding (and Lttery funding nly) t its per capita share. (Reprt Recmmendatins and numbers are quted in the text belw.) 13. A redistributin f funds alng the lines suggested by the authrs f Rebalancing ur Cultural Capital wuld d much t redress the imbalance in funding t benefit England as a whle. We believe this culd be achieved in a timely fashin withut threatening Lndn s wrld status as a cultural centre. 14. We agree with the Chair f the Arts Cuncil that the trend in shifting lttery funds utside Lndn shuld cntinue. Hwever, we believe the pace f change shuld be much faster than it has hithert been. 21. Just as the Arts Cuncil has played its part in helping t tackle the deficit, s shuld it be cnsidered a beneficiary in the event f ecnmic recvery. Once the Gvernment is satisfied that resurces allw, it shuld cnsider an increase in Arts Cuncil grant in aid. This new mney shuld be earmarked fr the English regins, beynd the M25 area. 22. The Arts Cuncil is well placed t tackle the clear imbalance f funding that favurs Lndn unfairly. It must d s with greater urgency if it is t realise its declared ambitin t engineer the prvisin f great arts and culture fr everyne. 3] A distinct fcus fr Arts Lttery funding Beynd gegraphy and as relevant t the situatin within Lndn as t that beynd it, the Select Cmmittee accepts that Lttery funding is and needs t remain distinct frm grant-inaid funding The principle f additinality shuld be adhered t bth in spirit and in practice and it highlights the Lttery Directins issued t the Arts Cuncil by the DCMS cited in the PLACE reprt and referenced abve. 4] A partnership basis fr decentralised and transparent decisin making The Reprt emphasises the need fr ACE t fund prjects within reach f where peple live and the Cmmittee argues that the Arts Cuncil is well placed t be the agent fr the redistributin 8

9 f funds. (Reprt Recmmendatins and numbers are quted in the text belw.) but nly if it engages fully with elected lcal authrities and reginal strategic rganisatins with the best lcal and reginal knwledge. 20. The Arts Cuncil shuld be mre practive when it cmes t encuraging high quality applicatins frm arund the cuntry and establishing the underlying reasns fr any current imbalance. 11. The Arts Cuncil shuld d mre t explain the criteria n which it apprtins funds t different art frms. It shuld prvide detailed infrmatin bth n the abslute and relative number f applicatins received and rejected, and the funds requested, brken dwn by general genre and gegraphical area. 12. The invlvement f lcal authrities is a welcme reflectin f the desirability f prviding sme demcratic input int decisin-making. Hwever, we believe there is mre scpe fr invlving lcal cmmunities and businesses. Art and culture can and shuld be available t all, and engagement will be increased if individuals feel they have had sme influence in a decisin t fund a particular activity r rganisatin. The GPS Culture reprts have argued that the devlutin f Lttery funding respnsibilities shuld be t an apprpriate cmbined authrity r reginal tier guided by the existing (r with revised) Lttery Directins and that that culd be achieved thrugh partnership negtiatin as such new structures emerge. They argue that the prpsal fr such devlutin, if made nw, culd intrduce the arts and culture as a cmpetence f thse emerging demcratic frmatins and secure the creative industries within the investment framewrks f the LEPs. Such devlutin is already in place fr the Arts, Heritage and Sprt in Sctland, Wales and Nrthern Ireland, each f them cuntries with far smaller ppulatins than the English Regins.... and a respnse frm the Cre Cities Grup We believe the respnse t the Select Cmmittee Reprt frm the Cre Cities Grup t be f particular significance and that their cnclusins are f much wider relevance. (see in full at Nte the fllwing extracts. (Numbers are quted frm their dcument in the text belw.) what is manifestly under the cntrl f ACE is the extent t which its lttery and treasury grant-in-aid spending is allcated. We agree with the 9

10 Select Cmmittee that greater urgency is needed in rebalancing this spend. It is disappinting that ACE has recently determined its agreements fr the perid withut adequately addressing this issue. We therefre call fr ACE t act n the Select Cmmittee s recmmendatin that future lttery spend fr Lndn be limited t its per capita share; a plicy which shuld be implemented with immediate effect discussin (with the DCMS) must include the ptential fr alignment/ pling f funding fr culture and fr devlving cultural budgets (including ptentially natinal lttery funding) t a city, r city regin, level t enable us t take a lead in innvating and develping new mdels fr supprting the sectr, ptentially matching funding against bids t Eurpean surces. We believe this wuld be a mre cst effective way f wrking, bringing cultural planning clser t thse wh fully understand lcal needs, and integrating it with lcal decisin-making n a brader canvas, linked t place-making, ecnmic grwth, skills and public health. 23. We must guard against the idea that it is nly the largest rganisatins which are a cause fr cncern in this envirnment. The smaller cultural and creative businesses are essential fr the wider eclgy f the sectr and with the liabilities assciated with the largest, building-based and mst highprfile cmpanies, there is a real danger that we lse the depth and range f the ffer in fcussing nly n the rganisatins in the natinal prtfli. 27. We further ask fr devlutin f funds fr culture, nce a rebalanced settlement has been agreed, t deliver the natinal cultural strategy thrugh a series f city cultural strategies, apprved directly by DCMS. 10

11 Recmmendatins 1] Just d it! Begin rebalancing the natinal arts ecnmy nw The Arts Cuncil cntends that it is cnstrained frm ding mre fr the arts utside Lndn by the need nt t damage the arts within the capital. Hwever, the Select Cmmittee argues that ur prpsal t limit Lndn s allcatin f Arts Lttery funding nly (grant-in-aid allcatins wuld nt be affected) culd be achieved withut threatening Lndn s wrld status as a cultural centre. The Cmmns Cmmittee is right. Changes in levels f Lttery incme prvide a unique and immediate pprtunity t implement this change. Setting aside the current incmplete year, Arts Lttery grants in the last five years (2009/ /14) have ttalled 784 millin (a figure adversely affected by the Olympic diversin). New Arts Lttery grants funding fr the cming five years will increase t 1.2 billin (as frecast by Gvernment) fllwing full restratin f a 20% share f gd causes funding fr the arts. (surce: DCMS website The scale f this increase enables the ttal f Arts Lttery awarded t Lndn t be prgressively reduced t reach the strict but fair per capita target levels by 2019/20 while funds t the regins beynd the capital are increased by a matching amunt. This prcess wuld result in Lndn receiving the same cash amunt frm the Arts Lttery in as it received in It is therefre perfectly pssible t achieve a fair share fr Lndn alngside n cuts t Lndn and by the end f this perid (r earlier if required) arts and culture utside the capital will have access t 100 millin each year, weighted apprpriately, f additinal and devlved funds fr new investment. The supprting analysis, based n DCMS and Treasury figures, is attached as Appendix A. Jennie Lee s 1965 White Paper A Plicy fr the Arts: The First Steps was prescient: There is n shrt-term slutin fr what by its very nature is a lng-term prblem. This is a field in which, even in the mst favurable circumstances, it will never be pssible t d as much as we want t d as quickly as we want t d it. But that is n excuse fr nt ding as much as we can and mre than has hithert been attempted. (Paragraph 15) 11

12 2] A new natinal plicy fr the arts and culture where t start? During 2014, Arts Cuncil England published a hlistic case fr culture and an advcacy tlkit in supprt f it. The frnt page f the tlkit summarises the case fr public supprt fr the arts in a way intended t cmmand brad supprt (see extracts belw): The hlistic case fr public investment in art and culture is a way f thinking abut, and describing the benefits f art and culture its cultural value; hw it cntributes t a flurishing sciety, t educatin and t the ecnmy and hw these benefits are interdependent. Cultural value By this we mean the value f art t entertain us, t mve us, t inspire us, and hw it is crucial t ur identity as individuals, cmmunities and as a natin. Sciety Art and culture bring peple tgether; they make valuable cntributins t health, welfare and inclusin, reaching ut t vulnerable and marginalised cmmunities in hspitals, prisns and thrugh wrk with lder peple. They teach empathy, break dwn barriers and are vital t releasing the talent within ur increasingly diverse sciety. Educatin The arts are vital at all stages f ur educatin system, frm primary schl t life-lng persnal develpment. The arts are crucial t imaginatin, selfexpressin and creativity in yung peple and develp skills that imprve scial mbility. Ecnmy There is an increasing awareness f the ecnmic value f the arts. Art and culture develp the talent fr the natin s creative industries which are currently grwing much faster than the rest f the ecnmy. They als play a valuable rle in helping t revive ur cities and drive urban regeneratin, changing lcal and natinal perspectives and creating better places t live and t lcate businesses. Art and culture attract significant vital visitr revenue int the natinal and lcal ecnmies. [Surce: hlistic-case-ur-stry-and-key-messages/ 12

13 Our research and experience suggest that these and similar public benefits frm the arts and culture flw mst effectively and pwerfully (smetimes nly) when: they are deplyed thrugh targeted funding prgrammes develped fr the lng term fr and with specific cmmunities r specialisms, and in apprpriate partnerships with ther relevant agencies; they wrk with clse reference t each ther even integrating plicy and prgrammes at apprpriate lcal, reginal and natinal levels; they are delivered by cultural rganisatins and artists with the requisite skills and experience and with similarly lng-term cmmitments t place and/r specialism; there is recgnitin that active participatin in the arts and culture can very ften be the main rute t the achievement f the benefit and that such pprtunities prgrammes, facilities and expertise must be available lcally. There is widespread agreement (hwever tacit in sme quarters) that these precnditins fr successful delivery are barely met by Arts Cuncil England s current funding plicies, pririties and prgrammes. There is a very substantial disjuncture between the Arts Cuncil s plicy rhetric (what it says) and where and t which rganisatins, prgrammes and intended utcmes it allcates the vast majrity f its resurces (what it des). What the Arts Cuncil des can als be seen t be at dds with its wn restatement f the demcratic mandate it has frm Gvernment: The Arts Cuncil is spnsred by the Department fr Culture, Media and Sprt in rder t make the arts, and the wider culture f museums and libraries, an integral part f everyday public life, accessible t all, and understd as essential t the natinal ecnmy and t the health and happiness f sciety. The apprach t a new Natinal Plicy framewrk fr the arts and culture culd and shuld begin with a cmmitment t design a structure shaped fr the delivery f the identified benefits rather than beginning frm an inherited structure shaped by custm, practice and vested interest. It culd take up the pprtunity set ut in the Treasury Green Bk that states: The ther imprtant ratinale fr gvernment interventin is the achievement f equity bjectives. Befre acting, an assessment shuld be made f the extent f the inequality t be redressed, and the reasns it exists. 13

14 3] Research t infrm a new natinal plicy fr the arts and culture We hpe and believe that the evidence, analysis and cnclusins we have cntributed t the public debate in the past 15 mnths will help frame the terms f reference, the prcess and the discurse fr a new natinal arts plicy. Our wrk was intended bth as a catalyst and a finite bdy f wrk n public recrd. There are a number f issues that require mre and better cnsideratin than we have been able t give them, sme frm ur wn assessment f ur wrk this far and thers raised by clleagues frm acrss the cuntry. This list is clearly nt exhaustive. 1] New mdels t sustain lcal cultural life Our Cultural Cmmns In late Octber f 2014, the tw UK-wide rganisatins that specifically supprt and represent lcal creative cultural activity, Vluntary Arts and Arts Develpment UK, launched a research prgramme Our Cultural Cmmns (at Appendix B and t cllect evidence f existing innvative lcal cllabrative structures t sustain and develp lcal cultural infrastructure and then prmte best practice. Its mtivatin lay in the argument that ur cultural life first and last is lcal and that the rapid pace f change surrunding all ur lcal cultural spaces (changes t lcal gvernment included) and the rapidly increasing digitisatin f the wider cultural wrld means that previus mdels f lcal cultural planning n lnger prvide effective supprt. Hwever, there are new and emerging mdels, building n lcal cultural assets and making links with educatin, healthcare, the vluntary and cmmunity sectr, and lcal gvernment. We cmmend engagement with this research prgramme. 2] The rle f the artist We had intended t cmplete an additinal research prject n the rle f the Artist and f the small arts cmpany/larger arts prject. The wrk ccasined by the Select Cmmittee s Inquiry has precluded that. We have, hwever, received imprtant input frm artists and frm rganisatins that wrk t represent them. In particular a-n, the Artists Infrmatin Cmpany, prvided much useful data and advice arising frm their imprtant and influential Paying Artists campaign. This is an issue acrss mst art frms, with recent research revealing hw prly paid are directrs, writers and cmpsers in very many places and, in sme cases, by well-funded rganisatins. Likewise, issues abut the barriers t the widest recruitment f yung peple int the arts have thrwn a light nt the difficulties f getting the bradest and mst diverse grups f creative yung peple int specialist clleges and cnservatires. GPS Culture sught t respnd psitively by identifying a significant failure f current arrangements in the gap between a nce in every three years pprtunity t bid fr NPO status 14

15 and the ne in tw r ne in three chance f success in bidding fr Grants fr the Arts even at advised much lwer levels than has been the case in the past. We have shne a light n what we detect as a cncealed plicy that led t 350 rganisatins previusly in receipt f secure revenue funding f less than 100,000 lsing that funding, and n the Arts Cuncil s apparent willingness t breach its wn guidelines even t break its wn rules as and when it chses t d s and less than transparently. Meanwhile, evidence is accumulating f a new activism amngst artists ften thugh nt exclusively yunger nes cllabrating cnfidently under the radar acrss creative disciplines and within scial, ecnmic and artistic/cultural cntexts as prtfli wrkers and in flexible grupings, new rganisatinal frms and fund spaces. We believe that further investigatin f this field f artistic and culturally cmplex activity shuld precede and infrm substantive wrk n a new natinal arts plicy. 3] Devlutin why and hw weighted? The principle f per capita distributin is precisely the plicy basis applied t Sctland (ppulatin 5.3 millin), Wales (3 millin) and Nrthern Ireland (1.8 millin) by the UK gvernment. A natinal strategy fr the lcal will need t be implemented differentially in different parts f England with resurces weighted fr the challenges faced and with the cultural sensitivity that nly lcal knwledge can bring. Charting the distributin f lcal authrities gruped by their residents degree f current engagement with the arts at Appendix C illustrates the range f difference in the cultural challenges t be addressed within regins as well as between regins. There is general acceptance in similar areas f public plicy and finance that weighting in the distributin f public funds is apprpriate in principle (althugh the detail can be cmplex and is ften cntentius). In the case f the Arts Lttery, it is suggested that the key pints can be derived frm the 2007 Directins t the Arts Cuncil n Lttery funding. Thse wuld be: ease f access t Lndn and then, within areas/regins, t ther centres f availability f substantially funded arts and culture prgrammes r ffer; the levels f current engagement with the arts and culture by lcal authrity area (as abve and based n the DCMS Active Peple surveys); the levels f ecnmic and scial deprivatin (Index f Multiple Deprivatin). T these shuld be added a fuller understanding f the patterns f purchase f Lttery prducts. This infrmatin is nt made available by Camelt because f claimed cmmercial sensitivity. That is understd within the fine grain but shuld nt be accepted bradly as between Sctland, Wales, Nrthern Ireland and the English Regins. It shuld surely be required as infrmatin necessary t infrm public plicy? 15

16 4] Planning fr a secnd stage f rebalancing Lndn t d mre fr itself As it prepared t make its funding decisins, Arts Cuncil England identified what it perceived as the principal threat t the arts as being in lcal authrity cuts utside Lndn. That s wrng. This claim was demlished in Arts Prfessinal in Nvember 2014 (see: GPS Culture s wn analysis shws that whereas lcal authrities utside Lndn have prvided funding t the Arts Cuncil s Natinal Prtfli at 32% f the ttal subsidy level prvided by the Arts Cuncil, the equivalent (like fr like) figure fr Lndn is nly 6%. The prblem perhaps mre realistically lies in the failure f Arts Cuncil England and the DCMS t use the undubted financial leverage that they have t engage the Mayr f Lndn, the Lndn Brughs and the City f Lndn Crpratin, tgether with the crss-party representative bdy Lndn Cuncils, in funding Lndn s Natinal Prtfli Organisatins fr their wrk in the capital. As an example: The Lcal Authrity area with the highest net return t its Lttery players is the City f Westminster, whse ppulatin has cntributed 14.5 millin t the arts lttery since 1995 whilst its arts rganisatins have received 408 millin, an arts lttery surplus f 394 millin ver 20 years. At the same time, 26 majr arts rganisatins lcated within the City f Westminster received ver 91 milllin f annual grant-in-aid frm taxpayers (derived frm the whle cuntry) in 2013/14. In the same year 2013 the City f Westminster cut its entire arts funding budget frm 2014/15 nwards withut any interventin r negtiatin by either Arts Cuncil England, the Minister fr Culture, Cmmunicatins and Creative Industries (the Arts Minister) r the DCMS. Our research suggests that Lndn thrugh bth the public and private sectrs has abundant capacity t d mre fr itself and shuld certainly be asked t d s at a time f natinal austerity that impacts far mre in the regins than in the capital itself. There is a new cultural cmpact t be negtiated between England and its capital city. Such negtiatins wuld need t examine hw the Mayr and the 32 Lndn lcal authrities can be fully engaged in funding Lndn s Natinal Prtfli Organisatins fr their wrk in the capital. 5] Getting turism t wrk fr England s arts and culture Between them, 18 f the cuntry s largest and natinal perfrming arts cmpanies, galleries and museums, plus the British Library, receive 64% f all f the funds made available frm universal taxatin t the arts and culture in England. 475 millin ut f that 742 millin budget is distributed either directly by the DCMS, r indirectly by Arts Cuncil England. All but three f these beneficiary rganisatins are based in Lndn and perate 16

17 principally t the benefit f internatinal turists and residents f the capital and its immediate hinterland. We had assumed that basic infrmatin n audiences and attendance patterns at these heavily subsidised institutins wuld be publicly available. It is nt. Nr, it seems, is it even rutinely cllected by the DCMS r the Arts Cuncil as part f reprting fr grant aid. Infrmatin estimated where necessary such as the breakdwn f audiences/visits between internatinal visitrs, visitrs frm the UK natins and English Regins, crprate ticket purchasers, repeat/regular audience members, shuld be sught and made publicly available. We can see n justificatin based n cmmercial sensitivity that wuld utweigh the relevant public interest. Frm the infrmatin that is accessible, it is clear that a very high prprtin f attendances at the Natinal Galleries and Museums in Lndn is internatinal (pssibly well ver 50%). Whilst preserving (the hard wn right f) free admissin fr UK residents, a mdest charge fr visitrs t the cuntry culd surely be cnsidered? This is the nrmal and expected pattern acrss Eurpe s majr capitals and cultural cities, where, in additin, city authrities increasingly levy a small marginal daily htel (r city ) tax that helps t supprt cultural infrastructure. Given the existence f this practice in ther cuntries (USA included), we cannt see why this shuld put Lndn at any disadvantage t its cmpetitrs. 6] What des natinal mean? What is the rle f the natinal institutins? We acknwledge that ne functin f ur natinal cmpanies perhaps riginating frm a time when scale and lcatin were the nly measures f internatinal status and quality is t maintain an internatinal benchmark within the UK against which thers can judge themselves. A crllary f this is t wrk clsely with similar cultural institutins acrss the wrld t develp internatinal scale prjects and exchanges fr the benefit f the whle f the UK. We knw, hwever, that it s nt just the very largest natinal cmpanies that can legitimately and inspiratinally achieve internatinal standards and develp internatinal cllabratins. Aspiratins t the highest internatinal scales f wrk are, nevertheless, critically dependent n financial resurces, which sadly few f even the largest nn-lndn based cultural rganisatins can access. Supprt and acknwledgement shuld, we believe, be available t cmpanies f internatinal status and prper natinal remit that are based acrss the cuntry and are nt part f the Lndn cluster. Given the very small number f rganisatins funded at the highest levels, the ntin f Natinal Cmpanies in the Regins will cntinue t be a title that invites cmparative judgement withut prviding the resurces t make such cmparisns valid r real. This is, we strngly believe, a cnsequence f funding plicies and patterns. It is nt based n the distributin f talent and ambitin. In the circumstances where ur natinal museums, galleries, library and perfrming arts cmpanies cmmand 64% f available grant-in-aid (and attract such a high prprtin f 17

18 the available private sectr and philanthrpic supprt), defining what a natinal rle might be and entail is imprtant. Understanding whether this rle is UK wide r English will be equally imprtant and timely. In this cntext, ur research revives the questin as t whether the very largest natinal perfrming arts cmpanies ught in future t be funded directly by the DCMS alngside their peer grup equivalents in the natinal museums and galleries (as well as the British Library) and whether the Mayr f Lndn and the GLA shuld reassume the primary funding respnsibility fr Lndn s Suthbank Centre, as was the case with bth the frmer GLC and the LCC befre it. 7] Tw r mre Lndns We are acutely aware that GPS s research has nt attempted t lk at the internal balances within Lndn as between large and small, inner and uter, richer and prer, better r less well served within the capital. This imprtant task remains ne fr Lndn s wn arts and plitical cmmunities t undertake. A research questin that als deserves attentin frm the capital s arts cmmunity is the fact that the scale and quality f the arts available in the capital ntwithstanding the levels f engagement with them by the ppulatin f Lndn is n higher than the average fr the rest f the cuntry if that, even. This must mean that either the methdlgy emplyed in DCMS/Arts Cuncil England s data purprting t shw levels f engagement is significantly flawed r there are factrs at wrk in the capital that are nt being prperly identified r understd. 8] Resistance... resisted At Appendix D we reprduce a reminder frm the RCC reprt f just hw determined plitical will has t be t resist established and entrenched vested cultural interests if change is t be achieved. 18

19 Appendix A GPS prpsal fr phased redistributin f Lttery funds based n frecast ACE Natinal Lttery incme fr the next five years ( ) cmpared with ACE Lttery grants made during the past five years ( ) Lcatin millin Average pa millin % millin 1 Average pa millin % +/- Av. pa millin Lndn % % (0.3) Rest f % % 83.5 England Ttals % 1, % 83.2 Frward prjectin f Arts Lttery grants distributin shwing phased reductin t per capita levels f funding in Lndn and the grwth f new investment funds beynd the capital in each year Funding % 2015/16 15/16 % /17 16/17 % 2017/18 17/18 % 2018/19 18/19 % 2019/20 19/20 % ttal % Av. pa Lndn % % % % % % % 52.1 Rest f England % % % % % % % Ttals ,200.0 Difference Increase and (decrease) / / / / / /20 % change ver Av. pa Lndn (4.4) (9.2) (15.0) (1.4) (0.5%) (0.3) Rest f England % 83.5 Ttals % Planning figures fr allcatin t grants taken frm Arts Cuncil England investment plan and extraplated t 2019/20. 2 The figure fr the Rest f England in includes 37.9 millin f grants nt allcated t specific regins by Arts Cuncil England during this perid 3 Surce. DCMS Website analysis f Lttery grants updated as at Nvember Althugh the figure fr Lndn is believed t be cntinuing at a higher rate than 30% in the current year, the Arts Cuncil s target is accepted and used as a starting pint in this indicative calculatin. 5 Shwing the differences between the indicated figures fr the year and the previus averages. NOTE The table cntains sme small runding errrs. 19

20 Appendix B Our Cultural Cmmns In the next decades: mst f us will be able t experience the arts and cultures f the wrld virtually; sme f us will travel t experience the arts and culture reginally, natinally and internatinally; but all f us will grw up and grw ld experiencing and participating in the arts and culture, lcally. (Nte: natinal is used here t refer t plicies applicable t each f the fur natins within the UK and the Republic f Ireland; lcal refers t an area such as ne served by a grup f General Practice surgeries r a cluster f secndary schls within a single lcal authrity, while reginal belw dentes a larger area, such as ne cmprising a grup f lcal authrity areas with sme functinal and cultural cherence) Our cultural life first and last is lcal. What can we d as creative citizens in ur lcal cmmunities and with ur lcal authrities and supprted reginally and natinally t make these cultural cmmns the life-enhancing places we aspire t fr urselves, ur grandparents, parents, children and grandchildren thrughut ur and their lives? What pprtunities can we secure fr all f us t explre and extend whatever gifts and talents in the arts we have been given and cultural interests we have develped as we grw? Hw can we ensure that exceptinal creative talent brn int whatever circumstance in ur cmmunity can flurish t its full ptential in the wrld while we supprt, enjy and jin in that jurney? What places and prgrammes can we sustain and develp fr ur cmmunities in all their diversity t: - cngregate t enjy and learn frm each ther s creativity and cultures (including experiencing culture in different languages, r in ur language f chice); - be challenged and inspired by the new; - relax in nstalgia and the familiar and - discver and celebrate ur heritages - natural and built and intangible? Hw can we make ur cultural cmmns places where: jy and grief can be shared; wellbeing, 20

21 cncern, caring, kinship and respect are prmted; happiness and laughter, wnder and curisity and learning are everyday experiences? Hw d we ensure that ur lcal prgrammes are designed upwards frm the assets we already knw we have and can deply rather than beginning with a deficit in what we have lst r never had? Hw d we ensure address t tw f the largest prblems cnfrnting us: the persnal, scial and ecnmic csts f an ageing ppulatin and the whle life cnsequence f skills deficits and structural unemplyment fr the yung? Schls, clubs, pubs, churches, chapels, msques, temples, synaggues, shps, cmmunity centres, sprts centres, arts centres, health centres, play centres, care hmes, libraries, lcal radi, galleries, museums, heritage sites, gardens, parks, beaches and mre are the infrastructure that underpins ur ambitin. Creative cultural activity f all kinds, wven thrugh these institutins, empwers and energises their ptential t realise that ambitin. The rapid pace f change surrunding all ur lcal cultural spaces, including changes t lcal gvernment, and the rapidly increasing digitizatin f the wider cultural wrld, means that previus mdels f lcal cultural planning are n lnger effectively prviding supprt. Hwever, there are new and emerging mdels, building n lcal cultural assets and making links with educatin, healthcare, the vluntary and cmmunity sectr, and lcal gvernment. What can be dne t understand them better, supprt them and prmte best practice? 21

22 Appendix C Distributin f English lcal authrities gruped by their residents degree f current engagement with the arts A natinal strategy fr the lcal will need t be implemented differentially in different parts f England with resurces weighted fr the challenges faced and with the cultural sensitivity that nly lcal knwledge can bring. Charting the distributin f lcal authrities gruped by their residents degree f current engagement with the arts illustrates the range f difference in the cultural challenges t be addressed within regins as well as between regins. % f LAs by regin with lwest t highest levels f art engagement Lwest 20% Lw 21% 40% Mid 41% 60% Upper 61% 80% Highest 20% Lndn Suth East East E. Midlands W. Midlands Suth West Nrth East Nrth West Yrks & Humber 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 22

23 Appendix D The White Paper at 50. A radical ambitin and resistance... resisted The authrs f the 1965 White Paper were clearly very aware f the recent histry f the Arts Cuncil when they prpsed their radical refcusing f plicy n capital and institutinal infrastructure in the regins utside Lndn in partnership with lcal gvernment, the universities, the business sectr and trade unins. Three extracts frm the intrductin t the paper give a flavur f the whle. A wide cultural cncern In any civilised cmmunity the arts and assciated amenities, serius r cmic, light r demanding, must ccupy a central place. Their enjyment shuld nt be regarded as smething remte frm everyday life. The prmtin and appreciatin f high standards in architecture, in industrial design, in twn planning and the preservatin f the beauty f the cuntryside, are all part f it. Beginning in the schls, and reaching ut int every crner f the natin s life, in city and village, at hme, at wrk, at play, there is an immense amunt that culd be dne t imprve the quality f cntemprary life. (Paragraph 14) Rebalancing the natin If a sane balance f ppulatin between nrth and suth, east and west, is t be achieved, this kind f develpment (reginal and lcal facilities) is just as essential as any mvement f industry r prvisin f public utility service. If the eager and gifted, t whm we must lk fr leadership in every field, are t feel as much at hme in the nrth and west as in and near Lndn, each regin will require high pints f artistic excellence. (Paragraph 10) N excuses fr nt acting There is n shrt-term slutin fr what by its very nature is a lng-term prblem. This is a field in which, even in the mst favurable circumstances, it will never be pssible t d as much as we want t d as quickly as we want t d it. But that is n excuse fr nt ding as much as we can and mre than has hithert been attempted. (Paragraph 15) This plicy fcus was briefed against by the Cabinet Secretary, (Sir) Burke Trend, t the Prime Minster, Harld Wilsn: The draft White Paper cncentrates n the need t develp artistic activities and enjyment utside Lndn, particularly by the encuragement f reginal and lcal arts assciatins and arts centres. This presentatin can perhaps be justified in relatin t the Gvernment s industrial and scial plicies fr reginal and regeneratin. But it is very nticeable that the wrk f the great natinal institutins is taken fr granted in the White Paper, in the sense that they are nt singled ut fr any degree f special mentin and d nt feature in the sectin n the Gvernment s prpsals. It is arguable that the White Paper tilts the balance t far in this respect and that a balanced presentatin wuld make rather mre f what the natinal institutins have achieved 23

24 and f the need t maintain their develpment. They are imprtant fr the whle cuntry, nt just fr Lndn, because they are the apex f the pyramid: they set standards fr the whle cuntry and prvide the utlet thrugh which natinal talent reaches the internatinal scene. Perhaps the intrductin t the White Paper culd be edited t reflect this pint A handwritten nte in the margins f this mem says t cpy it (with this paragraph highlighted) int the Appintments file pending a lbbying visit frm an Arts Cuncil delegatin. In the event there were n discernible changes t the intrductin althugh at paragraph 76 (ii) we find what lks like an edit taking the Cabinet Secretary s interventin int accunt, but in cntext it reads like smething f a rebuttal: 76 (ii) The Gvernment hpe t see a great increase in lcal and reginal activity, while maintaining the develpment f the natinal institutins. They are cnvinced that the interests f the whle cuntry will be best served in this way. It appears that whatever last-minute pressure was exerted by the Great Natinal Institutins, the Prime Minister and his redubtable Arts Minister stuck t their guns. 24