• 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 original Father Christmas – also known as Sire Christemas – used to carry not only gifts for those of us who had been good, but a switch to beat the naughty children. This aspect of the festive season has long disappeared in the UK, but the issues of judgement and decision-making, and subsequent reward or punishment, are still the hot topics for the Arts Councils in England and Wales. Increasing, decreasing or cutting grants must be the most thankless task for our arts bureaucrats. Even those who have benefitted will sympathise with their opposite numbers in other organisations who are left sucking the fuzzy end of the lollipop.
The question is, however, not just whether the right cuts are being made, but whether it’s happening in the right way. I think we can guarantee that the Royal Opera House won’t be appealing against its increase, but those companies struggling to process the idea of a 100% cut to be implemented within three months might be keener to turn to page 13 for counsel from our legal expert, Sean Egan. The Welsh experience looks likely to be a little less rushed: there will be six months notice instead of three. Whether this can meaningfully soften the blow for organisations seeking short-term solutions to long-term funding gaps is yet to be seen. We have to ask how the situation might change if the recommendations of Sir Brian McMaster’s report (p4) come into operation. Sir Brian recommends that funding decisions be based on judgement rather than measurement, and says that decisions should be made by peer review. We already know from the scientific community that this long-established format can fall victim to jealousy, favouritism and the inability of some professionals to take change and innovation on board. How could this be avoided in the sweaty maelstrom of artistic creativity? I’ve used the words ‘reward or punishment’: that’s how it feels to organisations that have had their funding cut, and in many cases it feels very unfair. Can peer review solve the problem of making a relatively unassailable assessment of the worth of an arts organisation’s activity? It’s a question that needs careful examination if the current unrest is to be avoided in future.

Catherine Rose, Editor