Arts Council England (ACE) is a body that does a lot of good for the arts. Over recent years it has done admirable work supporting artists from diverse backgrounds and from all regions, and after initial problems has started to spend Lottery money wisely and well. It has protected the arts from politicians interference so that the political meddling seen in Scotland and Wales (p3) has been resisted in Westminster. And, by and large, the artistic community has united behind ACE, collectively working to place the arts at the centre of life in England in the twenty-first century.
As ACE has moved closer to the heart of government, the arts have been taken more seriously by politicians and civil servants. Sadly however, some of the less savoury aspects of modern politics appear to have rubbed off on those who run Englands arts quango, and the subterfuge of spin dominates its recent review of the year (p1). Reading the review, one gets the increasing sense that facts are being submerged by suggestion and buried under bluster. To state on p37 of the report that staff numbers at ACE have fallen, when on p63 it is clearly recorded that staff numbers rose by 52 during the year, is at best misleading; and the transformation of a £2.6m increase in costs into a £1.4m a saving is nothing more than arithmetical sleight of hand.
In truth, ACE is, not unlike many public bodies, struggling with rising wage bills, pension demands and a need to improve management systems. However, instead of clearly explaining the impact of these problems, related costs and attempts to tackle them, it has chosen to obfuscate and dissemble. These are not characteristics likely to engender trust. Although the arts community broadly supports ACE, this support shouldnt be taken for granted. Those concerned and passionate about the arts have a responsibility to hold ACE to account, asking questions and demanding straight answers. And those questions are simple: what is ACE spending its money on and is it delivering? Straight answers are in all of our interests.
Liz Hill and Brian Whitehead, Co-editors