Community Focus – Political communication

Susan Ashmore thinks its time for a new relationship between politics and the arts

I become increasingly frustrated that participatory arts are not a force to be reckoned with at a parliamentary level. We often hear a particular government champion referring to the powerful, the transformational, and the instrumental. I hear about quality. But, more often than not, these are references made to or about the larger institutions offering recognisable art in the form of commercial music, dance, visual art, etc. However, what of the voice of the smaller grassroots organisations? This often goes unheard. It is a sad fact, but neednt be the case.

What are the consequences of us not having a voice in government? Working within funding structures allows for a rigorous negotiation of politics, and the possibility of advocating for the sector. It is frustrating that we dont use our skill in advocacy since many frontline organisations are able to speak eloquently about their work  how the arts benefit society and what they give to the communities.

I recently met with a political researcher who wanted to discuss the work of the sector. He researches for three MPs who have expressed a willingness to support the work of organisations working with offenders. He explained to me about early day motions, a particular tool used by Members of Parliament. An early day motion (or EDM) is a motion tabled by MPs, calling for a debate on particular subjects. This enables MPs to draw attention to an issue and canvass support for their views by inviting other Members to add their signatures in support of the motion. These motions represent a call to arms, a way of getting your message heard in the House of Commons. They vary, and can range from giving recognition for a persons achievements to a request for a change in policy.

Organisations can simply approach a Member of Parliament and develop a relationship to get support through this kind of vehicle. The arts cut across agendas, and it takes no particular skill to link them to local policy documents, community strategies or government legislation. We do it every day in every application for funding.

Is this Cameronesque psychobabble, I hear you ask? New Labour fashionable narrative or Liberal Democrat appeasement? Would we be seen to be supporting distinct political allegiances? Or should we be lobbying for a cross-party approach that states: the arts can be used when engaging people and communities and offer many transformational ways of meeting government agendas. Is there a rule book somewhere, or perhaps some kind of agreement that tells us who we should be talking to and when? Perhaps that would be a useful early day motion for the arts.

I read a lot about advocacy; well, surely, advocacy is also a tool that can be used when trying to gain recognition at a government level? It is, after all, another word for lobbying. It is useful for funding purposes. If we can sell our products to the untrained ear (which many MPs are when it comes to the participatory arts in social inclusion settings) then we will always excel at selling to funders.

As a political tool, the arts can be more suited to our aims than speeches or debates because we can begin to embody our ideals instead of merely relaying them as information  offering a different way of engaging in the world: one of creative rather than passive, of proactive rather than reactive. Its not that we should be more political, but that politics should be brought down to where we are at.

Susan Ashmore is Chief Executive of the Anne Peaker Centre for Arts in Criminal Justice.
t: 01227 471006;
e: [email protected];
w: http://www.apcentre.org.uk

The Anne Peaker Centres second annual conference focusing on the arts in criminal justice and social inclusion will take place on 9 June at BVSC in Birmingham.