Blog readers,
Below appears the first guest blog on Shenton’s View. It is written by Alistair Smith, The Stage news editor, and is a trailer for a new blog to be launched on The Stage website which will deal with news comment and analysis.
For the moment I am happy to welcome it as an occasional guest on my own blog to introduce it to regular readers. Please feel free to comment and let us know what you think.
Mark
The Tories made a fair stab at a Mission Impossible this week, when they set out their stall as to why they, rather than Labour, should be considered the ‘party of the arts’. Ten years ago - in fact, let’s face it, even ten months ago - this claim would have been greeted with guffaws (and maybe the odd boo). But nobody was laughing when shadow Conservative culture secretary stood up and told a room of assembled arts leaders what his plans would be for the cultural sector if his party wins the next general election. So, what was Hunt actually promising?
You can read about it in full here. But the main thrust of his argument was that, until now, everyone has thought (and I quote) “when it comes to the arts, you could sum it up as Labour good, Tories bad.” Now - he says - this is no longer the case.
He acknowledged that the Conservative Party’s track record is not perfect when it comes to the arts, but also claimed that Labour’s is not as good as they would have you believe. For example, they have - according to him - misused money from the National Lottery (a Tory invention) and used the proceeds for pet projects such as the Olympics rather than the four streams for which it was originally intended (one of them being the arts). Hunt, outlining the Tories’ new policies, explained that they would plough back more money from the Lottery into the arts, as well as finding extra cash from efficiency savings at organisations such as the arts council. [Admittedly, on this second point, he appears to be on slightly shakey ground - according to Arts Council England chief executive Alan Davey, the arts council has already hit the efficiency target which Hunt claims would create an extra £53 million.]
They would also help to raise the amount of money coming into the arts through philanthropic gestures from big business and well off individuals. Fair enough. Certainly, it’s an area that the current administration has been slightly slow off the mark with and, while, culture minister Margaret Hodge has given the subject plenty of lip service, very little has been done. The concern, of course, is that this extra cash might be used as a replacement for, rather than a supplement to, core Exchequer funding. Tory treasuries do not have a good track record in generosity to the cultural sector.
The final big point in Hunt’s speech - and the most controversial - is his refusal to rule out direct government funding for the major / national arts companies. It is something that was recommended by former Barbican managing director John Tusa in his report Tories on the arts sector last year. However, it is also something that - on the surface at least - appears to be a deeply unpopular suggestion among the companies themselves. Hunt fell short of endorsing the proposal, but it is clearly something that he is still considering. Whether this happens or not, though, one thing is clear. Under a Tory government, the arts council will change, with Hunt promising a renewal (whatever that means) of the organisation. Some people might see that as a good thing - especially following the recent controversial spending round - others might worry about the implications.
However, perhaps the most interesting thing to come out of Hunt’s speech on Tuesday was not in fact what he was saying, but who he was saying it to. If this had happened a year ago, practically nobody would have come. Instead, gathered in Portcullis House’s Thatcher Room [some irony there, considering her record] were a smattering of very interesting faces. A quick glance round and one could spot Nick Starr from the National Theatre, Christine Payne from Equity, Rosemary Squire from ATG / SOLT / TMA, Dominic Cooke from the Royal Court, David Lan from the Young Vic… I could go on.
The fact that all these people - many of them clearly not of a Tory-persuasion - were keen to come and listen to what Jeremy Hunt had to say is a big indicator of how far the Tories have come. Partially, it indicates that people are recognising that they are, at last, beginning to take the arts seriously. But, more significantly, it reflects the fact that - like it, or not - the Tories probably will be the next ‘party of the arts’ for the simple reason that they are likely to be the next party of government.
Hunt’s speech was essentially an attempt to assure the arts community that this particular leopard can indeed change its spots.
Do you believe him?
Amid all the remarks about redirecting lottery revenue etc, nothing at all was said about levels of Exchequer funding; indeed, the one-more-time impossible-dream refrain of upping the level of private philanthropy to American-comparable levels is a bit of a giveaway that actual government funding will be as keenly safeguarded under the Tories as ever, i.e. kiss bye-bye to it now while we can still draw breath.
Whatever Tory views on the Arts Council itself, the evidence is that, half a century on from Jennie Lee, the party still can't bring itself to accept that government itself has a direct role to play in arts funding, and indeed a responsibility to play that role diligently.
The Tories track record on the Arts is horrific. They are playing gentle with the Arts community now because if there are swing votes possible in the other wise labor oriented Arts community they want to get them. This is all politics. I fear for what would happen to the Arts Council and the manner in which theatres are subsidized if Government would have a more direct role in who gets what. Look at the US where a large majority - if not all - of the subsidized theatres play it "safe" so as to not offend either the government or their corporate sponsors. Be afraid. There is no reason to believe them.