Arts Council England (ACE) chair Peter Bazalgette has defended his organisation’s distribution of funding, saying ongoing council cuts pose a greater danger to cultural provision in the regions.
Speaking at the final hearing of a parliamentary inquiry into the work of ACE last week, Bazalgette said that the grant-in-aid distributed by the arts council was diminishing and accounted for an increasingly smaller percentage of cultural organisations’ budgets.
He also pointed out that the arts council was a “small funder” of museums compared to local authorities.
In a subsequent interview with the Observer, Bazalgette said ACE had a job to do to “persuade councils that the arts are essential” and warned that ongoing cuts could see local authority funding for culture halved within the next three to four years.
The arts council revealed last month that it had allocated £14m in emergency payments to struggling cultural venues in the past three years, with the largest bailouts going to organisations outside London.
Bazalgette told the select committee that ACE was actively working on correcting its historical funding bias towards London, which was revealed in the recent Rebalancing our Cultural Capital and Policy for the Lottery, the Arts and Community in England reports.
He said a much greater proportion of arts council funding was being allocated outside London, with 70% of lottery money now going to the regions. He also confirmed that the arts council plans to increase the number of regional Major Partner Museums in its upcoming funding round.
But he argued that it was wrong to correlate funding amounts with population density or lottery ticket sales. He said: “There are clear rules that say these awards have to be made after a competitive process, otherwise we would be suspending all critical judgments on how to spend wisely.”
Bazalgette also said that the nationals, which are directly funded by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, should be doing more to protect culture and develop local partnerships outside London.
He said the arts council had a role to play to “encourage the nationals to have that sense that they’re national and responsible for the whole country”.
ACE director Alan Davey, who spoke alongside Bazalgette at the inquiry, said the arts council had taken a pragmatic decision to use lottery money to plug funding gaps, increase its Grants for the Arts fund, and support touring and bridge organisations. Davey said this was being done “in such a way that we’re protecting the principle of additionality”.
Davey added that, while lottery funding would not replace council cuts, ACE could use it as leverage when dealing with cash-strapped local authorities. He said: “We have to say we’ll help with this if you do that, we have to do a bit of horse-trading. But it’s not a direct substitution.”
Philanthropy
The committee subsequently heard evidence from culture minister Ed Vaizey, who caused controversy when he told MPs that some organisations were not doing enough to break down the “cultural, institutional barriers” to philanthropy.
He said: “I can see absolutely no reason why every arts organisation in this country cannot raise philanthropic funds…
“I think that too many arts organisations think, 'well, we live in an area where rich people don't live, so they're not going to back the arts'. I think that is pathetic, frankly.”
Cultural representatives have criticised Vaizey's comments, with Phil Redmond of National Museums Liverpool telling the BBC that the culture minister did not "appreciate the severity of the problem outside London".
Speaking at the final hearing of a parliamentary inquiry into the work of ACE last week, Bazalgette said that the grant-in-aid distributed by the arts council was diminishing and accounted for an increasingly smaller percentage of cultural organisations’ budgets.
He also pointed out that the arts council was a “small funder” of museums compared to local authorities.
In a subsequent interview with the Observer, Bazalgette said ACE had a job to do to “persuade councils that the arts are essential” and warned that ongoing cuts could see local authority funding for culture halved within the next three to four years.
The arts council revealed last month that it had allocated £14m in emergency payments to struggling cultural venues in the past three years, with the largest bailouts going to organisations outside London.
Bazalgette told the select committee that ACE was actively working on correcting its historical funding bias towards London, which was revealed in the recent Rebalancing our Cultural Capital and Policy for the Lottery, the Arts and Community in England reports.
He said a much greater proportion of arts council funding was being allocated outside London, with 70% of lottery money now going to the regions. He also confirmed that the arts council plans to increase the number of regional Major Partner Museums in its upcoming funding round.
But he argued that it was wrong to correlate funding amounts with population density or lottery ticket sales. He said: “There are clear rules that say these awards have to be made after a competitive process, otherwise we would be suspending all critical judgments on how to spend wisely.”
Bazalgette also said that the nationals, which are directly funded by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, should be doing more to protect culture and develop local partnerships outside London.
He said the arts council had a role to play to “encourage the nationals to have that sense that they’re national and responsible for the whole country”.
ACE director Alan Davey, who spoke alongside Bazalgette at the inquiry, said the arts council had taken a pragmatic decision to use lottery money to plug funding gaps, increase its Grants for the Arts fund, and support touring and bridge organisations. Davey said this was being done “in such a way that we’re protecting the principle of additionality”.
Davey added that, while lottery funding would not replace council cuts, ACE could use it as leverage when dealing with cash-strapped local authorities. He said: “We have to say we’ll help with this if you do that, we have to do a bit of horse-trading. But it’s not a direct substitution.”
Philanthropy
The committee subsequently heard evidence from culture minister Ed Vaizey, who caused controversy when he told MPs that some organisations were not doing enough to break down the “cultural, institutional barriers” to philanthropy.
He said: “I can see absolutely no reason why every arts organisation in this country cannot raise philanthropic funds…
“I think that too many arts organisations think, 'well, we live in an area where rich people don't live, so they're not going to back the arts'. I think that is pathetic, frankly.”
Cultural representatives have criticised Vaizey's comments, with Phil Redmond of National Museums Liverpool telling the BBC that the culture minister did not "appreciate the severity of the problem outside London".
