Theatres lose out to the ruddy Olympics!

[Sofie Mason]

Don't groan but I don't think we should just stand idly by as the money drains away from our theatres! Two weeks ago Tony Blair stood up in the Tate Modern and promised there would be no “boom or bust” in arts funding. Lest we forget, Arts Council spending has risen from £183m in 1997 to £412m in 2006/7 which is a very good thing and, as a result, theatre throughout the country has become more ambitious and more prolific, seat prices have gone down and attendance has gone up. Then just one week ago Tessa Jowell announced the ‘bust’ that Blair promised would not happen. Arts organisations will now lose at least £137m that will be redirected to support the 2012 Olympics. ACE chief executive Peter Hewitt warned that the cuts would be felt across the whole of England and disproportionately by smaller arts organisations” and the Editor of The Stage confirmed that “the scale of the plundering which has taken place has been of such severity that it very likely will erase whatever benefits Labour can point to by way of a legacy for the arts”. Is anyone doing anything? Is there anything we can do as punters and supporters of theatre???
I've been on many a march and many a picket line and handed in many a petition as a survivor of the 80's but I'm not sure what we can do about this........All suggestions welcome!

[Marcus Markou]

Hi Sophie, this has been written about before on BritishTheatre.com. Perhaps one idea is to document stories of funding cuts to theatre here on BritishTheatre.com. If anyone sees stories from other newspapers or hears them first hand, please feel free to document them here.

[Chris Johnston]

Have replied to Sophie's post. It would be good if there was a corner of britishtheatre.com set aside for monitoring the situation over the next few years.

Chris J.

[Sofie Mason]

This is a good suggestion, Marcus, and I hope venues do - I can't because I run www.offwestend.com with my business partner Kevin and we only have anecdotal stories from the 50+ venues on our listings site - I'll spread the word! By the way, I can't see where this was debated before on your Forum - am I being very dense?? Is there an archive I'm missing?? All Best Wishes - Sofie

[Chris Johnston]

I started a post about this a couple of weeks ago but I'm not sure anyone picked it up (Hurrah for the Olympics).

I've just had confirmed today that there is a 35% cut in Grants for the Arts for 07-08 - it's alleged by the Arts Council that this is due to 'falling lottery ticket sales'. Whether true or not, it should hit the press in the next few days.

Chris J.

[Chris Johnston]

As reported here but largely ignored, the news is finally breaking. The following email is from ITC (Independent Theatre Council) - also follow the link to the Guardian blog.

Dear Members,

It has come to our attention that Grants for the Arts will suffer a cut of 35% for the next year due to a fall in lottery tickets sale and a previous diversion of funds to the Olympics.

ITC has responded to this and is keen to make sure that we mobilise resistance from the sector.

Lyn Gardner has started a blog on The Guardian at http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/theatre/2007/03/this_arts_council_cut_w.... Please read it and respond to it so that the we can draw a significant press coverage on the issue. Responses could include examples of Grants for the Arts funding that has made a real difference to your work. Furthermore what impact will this cut have on your company.

We will keep you posted on any development.

Many thanks,



Alex Di Capua
Membership Co-ordinator
Independent Theatre Council

T: 020 7089 6826
E: [e-mail]
www.itc-arts.org

Independent Theatre Council Ltd
Registered office:
12 The Leathermarket, Weston Street, London SE1 3ER
Registered in England & Wales no:1892910

[James Hesford]

Hi that all sound very positive but it is not my reality. I don't want the Olympics to come here. Why
1. Regeneration. Sound great in Theory but what does it really mean. It means that artists who work on the fringe who need cheap housing to exist in the capital and rely on areas like Newham to provide this, will be forced out of the area as rents and property prices rise.
2. New Jobs. - oh really - in my experience in means more minimum paid jobs in starbucks and burger king or more street cleaning opportunites. All the jobs that pay well in administration etc will be filled by middle class people who do not live in the area.
3. Creating more opportunities for the Arts - Mmm. What does this mean - Does it mean more jobs for established actors and theatre companies playing in newly built theatres in the East End packed with tourist who come to London to see "Phantom of the Opera" and fill the coffers of the likes of Andrew Lloyd ----(him who's name shall not be spoken)

I don't think that the power house of creativity lies within the establishment. Lets get real. The people who get grants from the Arts Council are generally not artists. When did anyone last get money DIRECTLY from the Arts Council for writing a play or a piece of music etc. We all know that the money goes to Administrators and regional bodies who force ARTIST into being teachers and child minders - creating projects that "CONTRIBUTE TO OUR COMMUNITIES" - creating art that is qualified by how much it can put back into 'OUR COMMUNITES" in terms of 'EDUCATION" or "FINANCIAL PROFIT" (BULL SH..) Personally I am really tired of it. I have given up on the Arts Council as being representatives of ARTISTS. The Arts budget will be cut and I'm sad about it but it wont stop me doing what I do. However it does help to have a cheap place to live in an virbant environment and the Olympics is not going to help me. A vibrant community (in my opinion) is not qualified by the amount of tourists on the street but rather by how much it values culture and how creative it is. (AND I DON'T MEAN PETER PAN AT THE WIMBLEDON BLOODY THEATRE)

Having said all this I am really angry that money will be taken away from the Arts (Even though the Arts Council has it's shortcomings) - Especially I am sad for the few established bodies that create real value e.g the BAC which provides outlets without demanding anything other than artistic integrety (not even that sometimes) and I'm really sorry for the creative theatre companies who are working on a shoe string budget using up all their creative energy filling out forms and ticking off little boxes and trying to create useless community programs (GOD I HATE THAT!!!!)

Sorry here is my last rave - I promise. What could be done to draw attention to cuts in Arts funding????????
EASY - DEAD EASY - Equity and the Musician Union could organise a strike for a couple of days in West End.. All the Actors and Musicians could take a couple of days off. It will make front page news. WILL THIS HAPPEN - NO IT BLOODY WELL WON'T - WHY - BECAUSE EQUITY AND THE MU HAVEN'T GOT THE BALLS TO DO IT - AND ITS DUBIOUS WHETHER ALL THOSE WHO ARE "DOING VERY WELL THANK YOU" IN THE WEST END, WILL SUPPORT IT. IF WE LOBBY OUR UNIONS , OR BETTER STILL THREATEN TO QUIT MAYBE THEY WILL CONSIDER GETTING OFF THEIR ARSES.
Actually I quit the MU already after their pathetic attempt or rather no attempt to draw attention to the new music licensing laws so I don't hold out much hope for any Union intervention or help.
Have to go now and reconnect my self to my lybrium drip. bye. James xxxx

[Ray Jones]

James
Order more Librium for 2012
Sounds like you are going to need plenty
I think some of your conclusions are spot-on but they do sound like the argumaents I heard about why the ghastly "East End" tower blocks should have been kept in what we now call Docklands
That regeneration is undoubtedly corporate, middle class and fortunately "world class"
I believe that many of the thousands of workers / residents there attend the arts and many of the companies help to fund the arts too
King Kanute had terrible trouble with the sea

[James Hesford]

Hi Just a few comments about your reply. (Thanks by the way - nice to hear from you.)
1. About the tower blocks - I do agree that they look ugly but then a home is better than no home.
2. World Class - what does that mean. Are we talking architecture - sure if we are then ok but world class people dubious.
3. As far a holding back the sea. We wouldnt have to do that if the same multinationals who are building those world class structures, who pull down buildings and destroy commmuties and replace them with sterile environments, hadn't contributed so much to Global Warming in the first place.

I didn't say that workers didn't attend the arts.

Have a nice day.

James

[Ray Jones]

James

There often comes a point in a debate where you decide you like the person on the other side of the argument and concede.

I am there

You have a nice day too

Ray

[Ray Jones]

Sophie

As someone involved in tourism - and being a Londoner - I am passionately in favour of London hosting and putting on a fabulous Olympics. I believe it will give us a "World Stage" for the time it is on, will regenerate more of our capital city and provide a legacy to be enjoyed by the next and future generations.

However, I dont want to see theatre or the arts suffer to deliver the Olympics.

I dont envy those at the top that have to make budgets balance, but we must identify them and lobby as hard as possible to keep theatre infrastucture alive and well.

I believe the Olympics will create opportunities for theatre and the arts, I further believe that our cultural richness helped us to win the bid.

Keep the debate alive

People will start to listen!

Ray

[Sofie Mason]

Dear Ray
Thank you for bringing a very welcome balance to my rant about the Olympics! You are right, the two issues should not be opposed – both arts and sport should be supported. I remember when the Lottery money first started being apportioned to ‘charitable’ causes and the tabloids screamed about public money going to fey artists rather than hospitals – I made myself hoarse arguing that it was a false opposition as public money should go to both the necessities of life and the quality of life. So point taken!

But the debate about what to about the cuts continues and with particular passion on Lyn Gardner’s blog on The Guardian site where, amongst all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, voices are coming through with practical suggestions. It’s a bit long but this comment from David Jubb of Battersea Arts Centre is the most incisive:

“The news of the reduction of Grants for the Arts funding from the Arts Council is rubbish. It is rubbish for two reasons.
Firstly, I heard about it, as did the rest of us, via rumours, gossip, in corridors, in hushed tones. "Have you heard...it's forty million...it's twenty million...it's more than a third of Grants for the Arts...it's fifty percent...it's the Olympics effect...the Olympics effect is still to come...it's about lotto sales...don't worry it might not happen...it starts tomorrow!? It is a rubbish way to hear about a massive reduction in a vital stream of arts funding. We need transparency and good collaboration with the Arts Council.
It is also rubbish because Tony Blair said in his recent speech at The Tate: We have avoided boom and bust in the economy. We don't intend to resume it in arts and culture. I agreed with Blair's speech when he talked of the creative economy as a vital cornerstone of the UK's economic future. The Arts Council's decision to massively reduce Grants for the Arts from tomorrow morning seems fantastically at odds with the rhetoric. Was Peter Hewitt, the Arts Council's Chief Exec, listening to Blair at the Tate? He must have known about the Grants for the Arts cut. Were you sitting next to him? Was he shifting uncomfortably in his seat?...knowing he was about to preside over a massive loss in arts funding totally at odds with what the geezer standing in front of him was saying?!
It's critical to understand the vital role Grants for the Arts or G4A play in the ecology of the arts sector. Since the demise of unemployment benefit, G4A has become an essential lifeblood for the arts. It was unemployment benefit that funded many individual artists and companies in their early careers who have gone on to become world-class British institutions, helping to make the UK the world's creative hub. It is now G4A that enables artists to earn small amounts of money while undertaking artistic experiments. G4A are part of a revolution in funding the Arts Council have successfully and rather brilliantly delivered. If we're about to lose a third of G4A it stands to reason we will lose a third of the projects and artists that G4A supports. What do you imagine would happen to a company like Microsoft if it suddenly stopped paying for a third of its research and development, in years to come, it would be understood as a disastrous decision that saw the decline of the company's fortunes. It is exactly the same for the arts.
The theatre I run, BAC, like The Lyric's Studio, Arcola, Soho, The Place, Space Studios, and many others, are greenhouses for the arts. They are run by people who care passionately about the future of the arts and they provide, space, guidance, love, even therapy and nurture for artists. They do not provide artists with all the funding they need to pay themselves properly to make work. This is where applications to G4A are so important. It is these artists and these institutions that will feel the pinch. Could a number of focussed action meetings be useful, covering different agendas:
* understanding the need for a higher quality debate on arts funding, and repositioning the perception of arts subsidy to one of arts investment - in the same way we invest in our children's future because we know they will pay-back a dozen times over
* understanding the need for a better dialogue between the arts sector and the Arts Council. How can we get to the eve of a thirty-four million cut in arts funding and not have heard a peep from our investor?
* Understanding the need for immediate action to improve arts investment in 2007/8
I would be very happy to provide space at BAC for discussions relating to this topic, if that's useful or interesting to others.
I am also a pragmatist. And recognise that we have to tread carefully in the way we, as a sector, protest and fight this decision. There's a critical danger of quickly looking old fashioned in these arguments. And before long we'll find someone patting us on the head, and we might even find ourselves being grateful for the scraps we've been thrown.
We need to take a more robust and entrepreneurial approach to challenging the thinking behind this decision, and the wider malaise that lies behind it. I am interested in the spirit of Lyn G's original blog on this topic. It is the world class British institutions who will feel the impact of this cut in five years time. The Barbican, The Royal Opera House, The National Theatre, The South Bank Centre will all feel the impact of fewer exciting artists knocking on their doors because of this decision. Each of those four institutions, for example, is currently working with artists that have been supported by BAC and directly benefited from G4A investment over the last five years. Add to the mix other individual and organisational giants, Tate Modern, Baltic, London's commercial theatre sector, Art Angel, The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, Sadlers Wells, The Lowry...and you start to have a really interesting group of people who recognise that G4A investment in artists provides vital research & development and project funding that feeds their own futures. Of course that's not just by developing new artists but new audiences too. What if we were to encourage these giants of the arts sector to connect on behalf of all the arts?”
I will find out if these meetings are being planned at BAC and let you all know!
Happy Easter!
Sx

[Remy Bertrand]

If you work in theatre, don't like sport and live in London it's a triple whammy: 5 years of financial cuts for 1 month of brain-deadness and nightmarish congestion. Let’s protest! Have a Big Street Parade: the Olympics killed my mum! And must importantly: watch pinpoint and promote the few GOOD plays in town. Yes theatre can be boring but so can football, not to mention people wearing mini-shorts wile trying to outrun each other. Yet do you hear those people for-ever criticising their game?