…because as we know, there are known
knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known
unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But
there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. – D Rumsfeld (Feb 2002)
Amid
the illuminations of the Minister for Culture Arts and Leisure in the TV interview
last week with the ex-Chair of the Lyric, the presenter Mark Carruthers, about
the cuts that the sector is about to experience, ironically it’s becoming increasingly
confusing to know what is actually going on.
£870,000 was cut, because of the Tories.
But
the minister’s press statement said it was because of unfunded departmental
pressures.
And in the interview, it seemed it wasn’t a cut at all, it was a re-prioritisation
of funding to other demands.
Hot
on the heels of that rather confusing exchange, comes the news that the Arts
Council are not jettisoning their
Sustainability Programme. That must surely be a relief to so many that toiled
over making decisions to affect “permanent and significant change” for their
organisations. But the problem is, the programme isn’t actually being rolled
out either, instead the Arts Council is asking to run it parallel to the 2016/17
annual funding process.
In
the BBC NI The View interview, the Culture Minister couldn’t rule out seeing
more cuts, while at the same time she advocated for the arts and stressed “wanting
to be a champion for the arts”. And we are all the more reassured about how all
of this will add up when the minister tells us that “up to 80% of people have
enjoyed or participated in the arts, however there are many more that haven’t".
The
minister added it was “an easy decision to make”; to cut the orchestra (as
the example suggested) in order to fund other priorities, expressly "looked-after
children in care". Undoubtedly those children deserve every additional support
to increase limited life chances but there are organisations, indeed arts
organisations that do indeed support this activity. Some of them may ironically
be cut too.
The
fact that 32 organisations will see a significant loss of revenue this year,
will have a range of consequences. A great many of those organisations will have
little choice it seems but to cut the very thing that the minister wants to
promote, namely outreach into communities. Not to spite her, but because this
work is largely offered free of charge and is supported by funding alone. Now,
not all organisations will resort to this and I would urge all those affected
not to make matters any worse for the most marginalised here and instead to redouble
their collective efforts to support the widest engagement in the arts. Others
will not be able to deliver any additional aspects to tours, or events.
Options
become more limited.
Planning, when faced with uncertainty, more problematic.
Risk
grows, not participation.
In
seeking to stabilise the bigger organisations, there will in all likelihood be
less monies for the rest of the sector and less certainty. The ripples of this
cut/re-prioritisation/whatever will be felt by more organisations than just
those immediately affected.
And
in seeking to represent an integrated policy to support the arts (like that in
sport) whilst making these funding decisions where it is difficult to see the
policy direction, it all feels counter-intuitive to supporting any integrated strategy.
This
scenario seems to be playing out across all areas, affecting the vulnerable most.
The Third Sector, those working in all charitable institutions wishing to do
good and provide significant civic benefit through public funding, are having
an increasingly worrying time of it. All Third Sector organisations are
governed by volunteers: It is their personal reputation and indeed, liability
that is at stake. When any charitable organisation is plunged into such
uncertainty, and policy and funding decisions are made in an increasingly ad
hoc way, it makes the work and position of ordinary people very vulnerable. The
personal liability of a great swathe of the sector is increasingly under
threat. As are jobs, access and indeed participation, in all facets of life.
As
some ministers operate their semi-detached postures, “the hokey-cokey arrangements”
as some newspapers rather flippantly refer to it, or as other ministers are
indeed at their desks making "good and bad decisions", it is very easy to get
lost in the confusion of it all.
The
constant stream of mixed messages makes everything so garbled. There seems to
be no respite.
But really, what can we expect? We have been public funding
dependent for decades because of the huge, almost intractable problems we had
during our conflict and now as an aftermath of that tumult, when we require
support to continue into prosperity and peace, we find we are being denied the resources.
Our understandable yet undeniable dependency cannot be managed by simply turning
off the money supply. If we do not constructively offer greater mitigating
support to all agencies and services, things will not simply wither away – they
will fall apart.
There can be little confusion about that.
No comments:
Post a Comment