The clock is ticking down on Britain’s exit from the European Union, and the government’s vision for what Brexit will look like – which has been muddled, vague and, at times, chaotic – finally seems to be coming into clearer view after a provisional deal on transition arrangements was reached with EU negotiators last month.
Barring any further political upheaval, Britain will officially leave the EU, single market and customs union on 29 March 2019, but has agreed a transition period until December 2020, during which things will remain much the same. Theresa May has also said the government will make “binding commitments” to align with EU rules and regulations in certain areas after that transition.
Like other industries, the culture sector has been somewhat paralysed by uncertainty following the referendum – some museums are believed to be running into difficulties planning activities such as loans and touring exhibitions, which can often be years in the making.
Future is unclear
The greater clarity offered by last month’s deal on the transition period may help to dissipate some of that uncertainty and enable organisations to plan with greater confidence in the near future, but the long-term outlook is still far from clear.
In the first few months of 2018, a lot of research and debate has been taking place among cultural stakeholders on the impact that Brexit will have – and is already having – on arts and culture.
The one thing that stands out from all of that dialogue is that the culture sector has not managed to muster any enthusiasm for leaving the EU since the referendum. Alistair Brown, the Museums Association’s (MA) policy officer, says: “People are very worried about Brexit. It’s hard to find anybody who’s got anything good to say about it.”
That view was echoed at a conference organised by the Creative Industries Federation (CIF) on Brexit last month, according to the organisation’s deputy head of policy and public affairs Samuel Young. “People are looking forwards and want to be practical, but they see such a huge benefit from the single market and customs union in terms of access and collaboration. From speaking to members, there hasn’t been any shift in their views.”
Young says of the topics discussed at the CIF conference, concern about freedom of movement emerged as the dominant issue – and it’s an area where the effects of Brexit are already being felt. “Some EU staff have started moving back and it’s getting harder to get key specialists into roles – there’s much less interest,” he says.
At the conference, several speakers called on the government to provide clarity on the freedom of movement for talent in the creative industries. The architect Amanda Levete, who designed the Victoria and Albert Museum’s Exhibition Road extension, said there should be no compromise on the opportunity to recruit freely and warned that “migration of talent happens very quickly”.
Smaller recruitment pool
Museums and galleries are particularly sensitive to this narrowing of the recruitment pool. The MA’s Museums in the UK 2018 survey, published in February, found that citizens from areas of the EU outside of the UK make up 4% of the museum workforce – and a third of museums could have their staffing arrangements disrupted by Brexit.
“There’s a big chunk of EU staff in very specialist roles who are not easily replaceable,” says Brown.
“In addition, trying to recruit internationally is difficult because many museums don’t pay enough to meet the visa threshold.”
Concerns about free movement were borne out more widely in a recent Arts Council England (ACE) survey of more than 1,000 cultural organisations, which revealed that most respondents said the reduced freedom of movement of people, goods and services would have a negative impact not just on their workforce, but also on areas such as touring and artistic quality. Many cited concerns about the increased administrative burden and costs associated with insurance and excise duties, while one respondent highlighted the impact that the loss of the EU’s cultural exemption for VAT would have on touring costs.
Leaving the customs union could cause particular issues for museums lending objects. Brown says: “It’s not that lending will come to a complete halt, but once we’re out of the customs union and shared agreements around things such as indemnity insurance, there will be less of it, because it will be harder.”
Some respondents to the ACE survey cited concerns that these difficulties would lead to a reduced appetite among EU institutions to receive UK collections.
EU funding streams dry up
Loss of EU funding is also a worry for the culture sector. A second report published in February by ACE found that museums in England had received £32.8m between 2007 and 2016 from a diverse range of EU funding streams, including some less obvious areas such as agriculture and rural funding (see box).
In addition to the EU investment, there are fears in the sector that the economic hit that is predicted to accompany Brexit may have an impact on internal UK funding for culture, which has already declined significantly under the government’s austerity programme.
Northern Ireland may be the nation where the impact of Brexit on museums is felt most keenly. A research paper released in February by the Irish Museums Association and Ulster University found that the legacy of funding provided not just through regular funding streams, but also through the EU’s Peace initiatives, has had a significant impact on the sector. That funding has included a £3.6m grant from the EU’s Peace III Programme Reach to establish two Museum of Orange Heritage sites in Belfast and Armagh, and a grant of £6.125m from the European Regional Development Fund to develop the Giant’s Causeway Visitor Experience.
The report called on the governments of Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic to provide funding for a comprehensive audit of how Brexit is likely to affect the Irish museum sector, as well as training and guidance in areas such as movement of collections. It seems inevitable that some of the valuable cross-border work museums currently undertake will diminish, however. The report warned that while existing working relationships established via EU programming would continue, opportunities for new projects “would be limited”.
Across the culture sector, there is widespread concern about how Brexit might lead to a loss of partnerships, networks and opportunities for collaboration. Aside from the bureaucratic challenges it presents, some culture professionals surveyed by the arts council expressed concern that Brexit has created a perception abroad that the UK has become insular and isolationist.
This raises a related issue; the culture sector may feel that way about Brexit, but many of their leave-voting audiences do not share that view. In that sense, Brexit should act as a “wake-up call for museums to understand the communities they serve”, says Brown.
Tony Butler, the chief executive of Derby Museums, thinks this should be the focus while talks play out. “We were incredibly complacent,” he says. “We do need to step back and look at our communities, and acknowledge that a range of inequalities exist that made the vote happen.”
Nobody’s listening
Underlying all of these debates, however, is the fear that no matter how many impact reports it produces, the voice of the culture sector just isn’t being heard where it matters – in the top circles of government.
The CIF’s Samuel Young says there is some cause for optimism following the prime minister’s Mansion House speech, where she gave a nod to the creative industries, and mentioned cultural and education programmes.
Brown is less sure that anyone in government is listening. “It is beginning to feel that the whole creative industries sector is being overlooked,” he says. “It’s very difficult to see how the information we present is affecting how decisions are made. It’s not exactly a model of good policy-making.”
The Museums Association Conference & Exhibition 2018 takes place at Belfast Waterfront on 8-10 November.
Regional/ERDF* £13.1m
Research £10.8m
Interreg £4.8m
Agriculture £1.5m
Education/training/youth £1.2m
Culture £1.1m
Fisheries £141,590
Europe for Citizens £19,708
*European Regional Development Fund
Barring any further political upheaval, Britain will officially leave the EU, single market and customs union on 29 March 2019, but has agreed a transition period until December 2020, during which things will remain much the same. Theresa May has also said the government will make “binding commitments” to align with EU rules and regulations in certain areas after that transition.
Like other industries, the culture sector has been somewhat paralysed by uncertainty following the referendum – some museums are believed to be running into difficulties planning activities such as loans and touring exhibitions, which can often be years in the making.
Future is unclear
The greater clarity offered by last month’s deal on the transition period may help to dissipate some of that uncertainty and enable organisations to plan with greater confidence in the near future, but the long-term outlook is still far from clear.
In the first few months of 2018, a lot of research and debate has been taking place among cultural stakeholders on the impact that Brexit will have – and is already having – on arts and culture.
The one thing that stands out from all of that dialogue is that the culture sector has not managed to muster any enthusiasm for leaving the EU since the referendum. Alistair Brown, the Museums Association’s (MA) policy officer, says: “People are very worried about Brexit. It’s hard to find anybody who’s got anything good to say about it.”
That view was echoed at a conference organised by the Creative Industries Federation (CIF) on Brexit last month, according to the organisation’s deputy head of policy and public affairs Samuel Young. “People are looking forwards and want to be practical, but they see such a huge benefit from the single market and customs union in terms of access and collaboration. From speaking to members, there hasn’t been any shift in their views.”
Young says of the topics discussed at the CIF conference, concern about freedom of movement emerged as the dominant issue – and it’s an area where the effects of Brexit are already being felt. “Some EU staff have started moving back and it’s getting harder to get key specialists into roles – there’s much less interest,” he says.
At the conference, several speakers called on the government to provide clarity on the freedom of movement for talent in the creative industries. The architect Amanda Levete, who designed the Victoria and Albert Museum’s Exhibition Road extension, said there should be no compromise on the opportunity to recruit freely and warned that “migration of talent happens very quickly”.
Smaller recruitment pool
Museums and galleries are particularly sensitive to this narrowing of the recruitment pool. The MA’s Museums in the UK 2018 survey, published in February, found that citizens from areas of the EU outside of the UK make up 4% of the museum workforce – and a third of museums could have their staffing arrangements disrupted by Brexit.
“There’s a big chunk of EU staff in very specialist roles who are not easily replaceable,” says Brown.
“In addition, trying to recruit internationally is difficult because many museums don’t pay enough to meet the visa threshold.”
Concerns about free movement were borne out more widely in a recent Arts Council England (ACE) survey of more than 1,000 cultural organisations, which revealed that most respondents said the reduced freedom of movement of people, goods and services would have a negative impact not just on their workforce, but also on areas such as touring and artistic quality. Many cited concerns about the increased administrative burden and costs associated with insurance and excise duties, while one respondent highlighted the impact that the loss of the EU’s cultural exemption for VAT would have on touring costs.
Leaving the customs union could cause particular issues for museums lending objects. Brown says: “It’s not that lending will come to a complete halt, but once we’re out of the customs union and shared agreements around things such as indemnity insurance, there will be less of it, because it will be harder.”
Some respondents to the ACE survey cited concerns that these difficulties would lead to a reduced appetite among EU institutions to receive UK collections.
EU funding streams dry up
Loss of EU funding is also a worry for the culture sector. A second report published in February by ACE found that museums in England had received £32.8m between 2007 and 2016 from a diverse range of EU funding streams, including some less obvious areas such as agriculture and rural funding (see box).
In addition to the EU investment, there are fears in the sector that the economic hit that is predicted to accompany Brexit may have an impact on internal UK funding for culture, which has already declined significantly under the government’s austerity programme.
Northern Ireland may be the nation where the impact of Brexit on museums is felt most keenly. A research paper released in February by the Irish Museums Association and Ulster University found that the legacy of funding provided not just through regular funding streams, but also through the EU’s Peace initiatives, has had a significant impact on the sector. That funding has included a £3.6m grant from the EU’s Peace III Programme Reach to establish two Museum of Orange Heritage sites in Belfast and Armagh, and a grant of £6.125m from the European Regional Development Fund to develop the Giant’s Causeway Visitor Experience.
The report called on the governments of Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic to provide funding for a comprehensive audit of how Brexit is likely to affect the Irish museum sector, as well as training and guidance in areas such as movement of collections. It seems inevitable that some of the valuable cross-border work museums currently undertake will diminish, however. The report warned that while existing working relationships established via EU programming would continue, opportunities for new projects “would be limited”.
Across the culture sector, there is widespread concern about how Brexit might lead to a loss of partnerships, networks and opportunities for collaboration. Aside from the bureaucratic challenges it presents, some culture professionals surveyed by the arts council expressed concern that Brexit has created a perception abroad that the UK has become insular and isolationist.
This raises a related issue; the culture sector may feel that way about Brexit, but many of their leave-voting audiences do not share that view. In that sense, Brexit should act as a “wake-up call for museums to understand the communities they serve”, says Brown.
Tony Butler, the chief executive of Derby Museums, thinks this should be the focus while talks play out. “We were incredibly complacent,” he says. “We do need to step back and look at our communities, and acknowledge that a range of inequalities exist that made the vote happen.”
Nobody’s listening
Underlying all of these debates, however, is the fear that no matter how many impact reports it produces, the voice of the culture sector just isn’t being heard where it matters – in the top circles of government.
The CIF’s Samuel Young says there is some cause for optimism following the prime minister’s Mansion House speech, where she gave a nod to the creative industries, and mentioned cultural and education programmes.
Brown is less sure that anyone in government is listening. “It is beginning to feel that the whole creative industries sector is being overlooked,” he says. “It’s very difficult to see how the information we present is affecting how decisions are made. It’s not exactly a model of good policy-making.”
The Museums Association Conference & Exhibition 2018 takes place at Belfast Waterfront on 8-10 November.
EU funding for museums in England (2007-16)
Funding stream AmountRegional/ERDF* £13.1m
Research £10.8m
Interreg £4.8m
Agriculture £1.5m
Education/training/youth £1.2m
Culture £1.1m
Fisheries £141,590
Europe for Citizens £19,708
*European Regional Development Fund
