You would think that among the distributors and prospective recipients of lottery cash there would be some very out-of-joint noses but, while most are admitting it will be painful, they seem to be sticking to a rather muted 'disappointed but not devastated' line. Which is surprising since in real terms it represents a very substantial cut and will severely hamper their ability to fund new projects.
Reading between the lines it looks like some heritage bodies are not moaning too much in case it upsets the Treasury (which by rights should be picking up the tab for the Olympics) in the run up to the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). But will this softly, softly approach work?
The danger of relying on quiet diplomacy is that if it's too quiet it could allow the case for arts and culture to slip off the agenda. The publication of the next CSR has now been put back from summer to autumn, which means there is more time available to persuade the Treasury that museums and galleries are worth funding.
The prevailing wisdom so far seems to have been that a 'buttering up' tactic would work: flatter the fragile egos of the politicians who hold the purse strings; repeat often what good value for money the arts are, and how much previous government funding has paid off; and quietly wait for the cash to flow.
And Tony Blair's speech on the 'golden age' of the arts at Tate Modern last month (see p7) was taken by many as an indication that this strategy was paying off. How easy it is to be lulled into a false sense of security.
Museum and gallery directors were still basking in the praise of the prime minister's warm words when the rug was rather rudely pulled from under their feet by the raid on lottery funds.
Perhaps now is the time to turn up the volume on the case for museums and galleries. The British Library has publicly warned that cuts could lead to the introduction of charges for admission or limited opening hours and has set up a forum on its website calling for visitors to express their support for the library's work.
And ACE is encouraging artists, arts organisations and the public to write to their local MPs to make the case for maintaining arts funding at current levels. Perhaps museums and galleries should be encouraging the public to be their champions too.
If museums and galleries can make a noisy case in a coherent way then it is still possible to prevent the Olympic opportunity becoming the Olympic threat.
Sharon Heal, editor
sharon@museumsassociation.org
Reading between the lines it looks like some heritage bodies are not moaning too much in case it upsets the Treasury (which by rights should be picking up the tab for the Olympics) in the run up to the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). But will this softly, softly approach work?
The danger of relying on quiet diplomacy is that if it's too quiet it could allow the case for arts and culture to slip off the agenda. The publication of the next CSR has now been put back from summer to autumn, which means there is more time available to persuade the Treasury that museums and galleries are worth funding.
The prevailing wisdom so far seems to have been that a 'buttering up' tactic would work: flatter the fragile egos of the politicians who hold the purse strings; repeat often what good value for money the arts are, and how much previous government funding has paid off; and quietly wait for the cash to flow.
And Tony Blair's speech on the 'golden age' of the arts at Tate Modern last month (see p7) was taken by many as an indication that this strategy was paying off. How easy it is to be lulled into a false sense of security.
Museum and gallery directors were still basking in the praise of the prime minister's warm words when the rug was rather rudely pulled from under their feet by the raid on lottery funds.
Perhaps now is the time to turn up the volume on the case for museums and galleries. The British Library has publicly warned that cuts could lead to the introduction of charges for admission or limited opening hours and has set up a forum on its website calling for visitors to express their support for the library's work.
And ACE is encouraging artists, arts organisations and the public to write to their local MPs to make the case for maintaining arts funding at current levels. Perhaps museums and galleries should be encouraging the public to be their champions too.
If museums and galleries can make a noisy case in a coherent way then it is still possible to prevent the Olympic opportunity becoming the Olympic threat.
Sharon Heal, editor
sharon@museumsassociation.org
