Letters

Unanswered questions

Arts Professional
2 min read

When Andy Burnham announced the government initiative to give away free theatre tickets to young people under 26, I labelled it an elitist gimmick, given that grass roots amateur theatre practitioners were likely to be excluded. As further details have emerged, nothing has changed that view. On the plus side, the government acknowledges the importance of theatre, and that attracting younger audiences is important. But there are still unanswered questions:
1. There has been no explanation for the scaling down of the scheme by 38% from the initial one million free tickets announced in September to 618,000 at the launch. The funding still appears to stand at £2.5m, or the equivalent of just over £4 per ticket, when the initial announcement included reference to securing further sponsorship. Was this progressed or not?
2. I wonder how the initiative can achieve ACE’s aim of creating “a new generation of arts attendees”, reaching young people in England who rarely or never attend the theatre as a result of a single free night out. (Well, probably not entirely free by the time you take into account the cost of the programme and refreshments.) Just how will the experience of these first time theatre goers be assessed, and more importantly, how will the scheme be followed-up to ensure that the recipient who experiences ‘A Night Less Ordinary’ actually comes back again?
Having seen the list of beneficiary theatres, the concern that this initiative will exclude amateur theatre practitioners still stands. If the aim of the scheme is to encourage young people to participate in theatre to gain valuable transferable skills as well as take an active part in their local community, then I for one would welcome the scheme with open arms. But that would mean a more inclusive focus on both amateur and professional theatre – this scheme seems to ignore completely the amateur sector. Given that participation at all levels does not yet appear to be part of the plan, then I sadly still have to remain sceptical about the long-term outcomes of this scheme.