• Share on Facebook
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Linkedin
  • Share by email
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Linkedin
  • Share by email

St Andrews Day 2003, and a bold address from Scotland?s First Minister Jack McConnell declares that culture will be put to work in ?building a new and more confident Scotland?. Nearly two years and a reported £486,000 later, the Cultural Commission has finally delivered a 284-page report with 124 recommendations and an additional 245 pages of appendices (p1). Is it cynical to think that we are being asked to admire the size and not the quality? All the key parties in Scotland have remarked that it will take some time merely to read the report, let alone think about each of the recommendations.
Then there will be further deliberations and manoeuvres as fiefdoms are defended and rebuttals are issued. The rumble of debate about Scotland?s cultural future will continue to roll on and on. The big losers in all this thrust and parry are likely to be artists and arts organisations. The Scottish Arts Council can hardly be expected to keep its eye on the ball while its very existence is threatened. Local authorities are scrambling for influence and the politicians spin back and forth using the arts as a symbol of Scotland?s heritage one day and a tool for national renewal the next.

The arts community would surely endorse the Commission?s call for increased funding (which, of course, is unlikely to be a top priority for the Scottish Executive) but why should it support all the other 123 recommendations? In producing so much food for thought, the Commission runs the serious risk that very little of it will be consumed, or even considered. And we are still not at the end of the process of assessing Scotland?s cultural infrastructure. The report proposes the establishment of an audit of Scotland?s cultural assets, an audit of the collections of national organisations, a best-value review of those bodies with national status, the establishment of an International Unit, and at least half a dozen other advisory, investigative and advocacy bodies. The expression ?paralysis by analysis? springs to mind.

Liz Hill and Brian Whitehead, Co-editors