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

Andy OHanlon looks at the relationship between local government and Arts Council England, and sees a very one-sided affair.

Today, like all local authority arts officers in the Eastern region, I received a copy of a letter that Arts Council England, East had sent to revenue-funded arts organisations a month ago. The letter explained to the organisations that, depending on the outcome of the Governments Comprehensive Spending Review in the autumn, a number of organisations will not have their funding agreements renewed and that in the event of a standstill or a reduction in our funding, this number will increase. It stressed that, at this stage no decisions have been made. We are continuing to campaign for a positive settlement and we have a number of activities planned to support this.

Defining the relationship

I experienced a sense of déjà vu when I read this because I had written a very similar letter to Wysing Arts Centre, the Cambridge Arts Theatre, the Junction, Kettles Yard, Cross Border Arts, Curwen Print Study Centre, Cambridge Open Studios and Cambridge Film Consortium following cuts made to our local authoritys budget and the redundancy of the arts project officer last year.

At the same time as coping with these pressures, South Cambridgeshire District Council (SCDC) is dealing with planning growth for a 50% increase in the population over the next ten years. In order to achieve any kind of arts programme in our new communities I expect to work with all partners public, commercial, voluntary and community. To date, Arts Council England (ACE) has declined invitations to attend any meetings relating to arts facilities in South Cambridgeshire. I understand that ACE is disinclined to discuss future infrastructure with local authorities unable to adequately resource current services, but simply not participating in the planning process at this crucial stage could jeopardise arts services for a generation.

If, as has been predicted, ACE loses £289m from the Treasury and £113m of Lottery monies from April 2008, many funded arts organisations may close. This in turn is likely to have an impact on some local authority arts services. So just what is the relationship between ACE and local authorities at this critical time?

Early hopes

In the early 1990s, SCDC and the Eastern Arts Board (as ACE, East was then known) worked closely together, commissioning an independent arts consultant Bill Dufton to test the case for the arts. They undertook an audit and spelt out the financial and management options in delivering a district-wide service. An Arts Development Officer post was created to oversee the development of a strategic arts plan. This pattern was typical of rural district councils with arts-motivated councillors or senior officers in the Eastern region at the time, and most arts officer posts are the result of this 1990s partnership: a product of commitment to the arts, robust advocacy, astute political acumen and the targeted allocation of financial resources.

Over time, the incentive for a close partnership with local authorities has subsided. ACE Easts main interest is securing local authority support for the arts organisations it funds. Only an occasional interest is taken in more locally focused arts programmes led by local authorities, however concerned with audience development, inclusion or participation they may be. Partners might be expected to listen to each other, but with the Arts Council it is a one-way conversation.

Strengths and weaknesses

All the members of staff at the Arts Council I know are professional, knowledgeable and enthusiastic about the arts. However, I regret that the relationship between SCDC and ACE, East is now non-existent. The last link was cut six months ago when arts officers were notified, again by pro forma letter, that sub-regional arts partnership agreements between local authorities and ACE which in Cambridgeshire funds the Vital Communities research on the impact of the arts into individual and community development were being terminated. It took many months of careful negotiation to make these agreements and a long-term approach had been adopted: it took no time at all for the Arts Council to end them. There was no consultation.

Some really valuable things have been achieved through ACE nationally, notably Creative Partnerships and the local authority arts performance checklist and the recent ixia public art evaluation matrix. It seems that such things are perceived by ACE, East as mere add-ons, but these elements need to take centre-stage because they provide infrastructure and make the Arts Council more focused on delivering an enduring arts service. At the moment the lack of strategic direction is overwhelming.

A large part of the problem is that the Arts Council imagines that everyone is after its money; it sees itself primarily as an arts funder. Its description of itself as the national arts development agency is simply not credible. Yes, I appreciate the bursaries for local authority arts officer training (in the North West) and the grants supporting organisational development for nalgao, the National Association of Local Government Arts Officers. However, there needs to be a more involved policy debate, for example, about pathways for public participation to quality arts experiences, promotion of the efficacy of arts interventions in planning and building development, social and health settings, strengthening the creative industries and building a sustainable arts sector that doesnt always rely on grant aid. If the Arts Council budget is stripped down which looks like a possibility it is most likely to prioritise its predilection for funding what it considers to be key strategic organisations. I want more.

Defining a role

Has ACE, as the national arts development agency, ever attempted to define the words arts development? This essential aspect of its work forms the basis of the Department for Culture, Media and Sports (DCMS) targets for participation and on these it has simply failed to deliver. In Cambridge, for example, The Junction a youth club music and dance, professional and community theatre venue is going through the kind of post-arts capital Lottery trauma that some other parts of the country have experienced. As part of a second stabilisation scheme the Arts Council has installed an interim Chief Executive there, who is making decisions resulting in a number of redundancies and the termination of some of the venues most popular arts programmes. Local authority officers are extremely concerned about this but have not been consulted and are powerless. No doubt ACE East thinks that if we dont fund it, we dont care. Without notice, redundant staff and artists suddenly have to find new venues and partnerships in order to maintain their valued community-based work. They are talking to local authority arts officers. Perhaps other Arts Council regions would have adopted a more constructive approach to dealing with this difficult situation.

There is a case to be made for an Arts Council that is a genuine arts development agency one that understands the national scene in its totality and at the same time, through its comprehensive and informed network, can drill down to local detail; one that local authorities can call upon to assess the minimum national standard for the number and type of arts facilities required for a village of 2,000 or city of a million; one that can provide the best objective legal, planning and financial advice for arts organisations and artists at every stage of their development without interference in their practice; one that works closely with other institutions to foster a positive culture of arts development and does not limit or prescribe what is and isnt good art. Such an organisation would be recognised by the public as the observatory that can tell us where all the brilliant things are happening and also without fear those areas that need to make more of an effort. It would also be of real value to the commercial sector and could help key arts organisations to plan strategically without, necessarily, ever providing a grant.
An Arts Council pleading to government for the maintenance of its current budget is a depressing sight. I wonder what the campaigning activities will be and if arts officers will be involved? If the current levels of funding are maintained, the DCMS is likely to insist on new and let us hope more ambitious targets, ones that show a change in the culture of the Arts Council itself and certainly its relationship to local government.

Andy OHanlon is Arts Development Officer at South Cambridgeshire District Council.

w: http://www.scambs.gov.uk