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

The 2012 Olympics is a great opportunity for the arts and sport to come together on the same team rather than compete against each other, says Alex Homfray.
The last few months have seen a major row erupt between the arts and sport. In May, the Government announced that the Lottery would provide a further £675m to the 2012 Olympics at the expense of Lottery distributors to other causes. Arts Council England (ACE) lost £63m, on top of the £49m that it had previously forfeited. Peter Hewitt, the Chief Executive, implied that this was a betrayal: It was a surprise and a disappointment& ACE has been a staunch supporter of the Olympics.

A sporting victory

Playwright Mark Ravenhill, writing in the Guardian, put things more bluntly, I hate sport& the current battle over who gets public money the arts or sport runs a lot deeper than the run-up to the 2012 Olympics. It reflects a much wider split in our culture. By the end of June, the MPs on the Culture Media and Sport Committee had produced a scathing report criticising the plunder of funds from the arts. They also suggested that the Olympics would seize the lions share of corporate sponsorship over the next four years.

The arts look set to enter a lean period. The diminishing pot of Lottery funding will affect good causes throughout the UK, not only the arts sector. But this row is not just about money. It reflects a more general anxiety over the role of the arts under Gordon Brown. Every change of administration is marked by such anxiety. Will the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) receive more influence and funds, or less? Should the arts continue to make common cause with sport, or look for alliances elsewhere?

Working together

It is understandable that the arts feel the need to compete for the limelight every few years. Even under New Labour they must fight to get the recognition and funding available in other Western European countries. But it is a pity that the Olympics row is making the present situation so bitter and fractious. After ten years of the arts and sport working alongside each other under the new DCMS, it is clear that they share many values, audiences and challenges:

" There is intrinsic value in participating in the arts and sport, which individuals tend to express in intellectual, spiritual or emotional terms.
" There is instrumental value when groups of individuals participate in the arts and sport, which can be measured through increased spending in the local area, better health levels, less crime, etc.
" There is institutional value when arts and sport organisations engage and encourage individuals within their cities and neighbourhoods.

The arts and sport deliver huge social benefits through their inspiring effects on individuals. Therefore the arts and sport share a unique position within society.

Sharing audiences

Taking Part, the Governments recent survey of cultural interests in England, revealed the extent to which the arts and sport share participants. Three-quarters of adults who participated in the arts also participated in sport. This refutes Mark Ravenhills assertion that people divide into arty intellectuals or sporty jocks.

When the arts and sport do collaborate to overcome shared challenges, the results can be outstanding. Sport England, ACE and various partners have entered into partnership on several recent and on-going projects. The Spaces for Sports and the Arts scheme created or refurbished 269 school facilities which, in many cases, were opened up to the whole community. Currently being developed, The Cultural Opportunities Toolkit aims to ensure that arts and sport provision is hardwired into property development and regeneration across the country. And a further toolkit is being developed for local authorities, which should significantly improve the opportunities and funding available on a local basis.

Given the overlap between arts and sport participants, the arts and sport might progress to developing participation and audiences together. Few arts organisations advertise in sport venues or sport media, let alone create work with sports clubs. Perhaps the arts can benefit from sports relative success at encouraging participation among black and minority ethnic groups. Perhaps sport can benefit from the arts relative success at encouraging disabled people.

Gordon Brown was wise to keep the arts and sport together within his new administration. He was also right to identify the Olympics as the awkward member of the DCMS portfolio. The Lottery funding raid illustrated that the Olympics had not been clearly related to efforts to build arts or sport capacity across the country. Otherwise why raid the very funds that were driving such efforts?

Mind the gap

Yet Gordon Browns decision to remove the Olympics to another department risks widening the gap. It could create a situation where the arts and sport miss the opportunity to increase participation through association with the Olympics. Derek Mapp, Chairman of Sport England, has already warned that his organisations loss of £56m of Lottery funds would seriously endanger the creation of a sporting legacy.

I remain an ardent supporter of the 2012 Olympics. I am optimistic that we will find ways for arts and sport organisations across the country to contribute to the Games and to reach new audiences by doing so. Gordon Brown can help a lot here. He could increase DCMS funding by at least the rate of inflation. He could clarify the relationship between the Olympics and the remaining DCMS portfolio. And he could protect the Lottery from any further Olympic budget increases. Meanwhile, those of us working in the arts must look beyond the Olympics and continue to work with the sport sector. There is much we can achieve together.

Alex Homfray is a consultant with particular experience of cultural policy and regeneration. He is also the co-ordinator of the London Cultural Consortium.
t: 07980 282034;
e: alex_homfray@yahoo.co.uk

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and not of the London Cultural Consortium.