Looking for logic in funding debate
Cameron Hawke-Smith's letter defies logic on two counts (Museums Journal February 2005, p15). Firstly, with no evidence other than the arbitrary selection of case studies, he appears to conclude that small museums in phase one hub regions are at greater risk than their contemporaries elsewhere.
Secondly, he questions museums emphasising 'the social benefits of their work'. Is there any justification for public funding of museums at all unless they provide social benefit? I suggest that the argument that museums are 'good things in themselves…' is best discarded as it is easily refuted by those who cannot see any good reason for their existence.
The nature of future public funding mechanisms for museums (of which Renaissance in the Regions is merely one example) is under constant review: it is one of the key questions in the minister's recently published document on the government's vision for museums. The way forward will rely on empirical evidence and informed discussion. Regrettably, Hawke-Smith's letter contributes towards neither.
Alec Cole, director, Tyne & Wear Museums
Where is all the new money going?
We were led to believe that the era of the Mlacs and the 'Renaissance' was going to result in higher standards and an injection of substantial amounts of money for the development and support of museum services throughout the country, including the small/medium-sized and less-well-funded museums.
It is my perception that the greater proportion of this new money seems to be supporting large regional bureaucracies and their consultants.
There seem to plenty of reports, strategies, benchmarking etc, but I am unclear whether there have been any quantifiable improvements to the quality of provision of museum services and the care of collections, over and above those that might have happened had this new money been distributed directly to museums.
Ian Edelman, web manager, recreation and heritage, Hampshire County Council
Questioning equal opportunities
Museums should be commended for their efforts to be socially inclusive. In the 21st-century they should not be the preserve of the white middle class. However, many pursuing a career in museums are being left frustrated by the few available training opportunities/bursaries being restricted to those from ethnic minorities.
I am sure many will relate to my numerous experiences of finding an advertised job that could prove to be an excellent starting point for my career, only to be prevented from applying because of the colour of my skin.
At this point I imagine many are gasping at my audacity or spouting legal jargon while those ignorant and naive enough will find it easier to label me racist than to try to empathise with my frustration. No, I am not racist. I have no objection to losing out on an opportunity, providing it was competed for on an even playing field.
I'm well aware that ethnic minorities are under-represented within the museum workforce. I fully understand how a more representative workforce can provide a more representative exhibition programme and service. But when traineeships and bursaries are few and far between it seems unfair to restrict most to ethnic minority applicants.
The museum industry is hard enough for anyone to break into and everyone should have the same opportunities.
Katie Parks
Balancing the needs of disabled visitors
I read with interest the article Seeing the Light (Museums Journal January 2005, p24). I am registered partially sighted, although I am comparatively fortunate in that I do see quite well in one eye. I am also tall and suffer from back trouble.
Imagine my chagrin when I visit certain museums to find that the paneling is at such a low level that I have to bend right down to read it. I cannot keep this up for long, so I end up frustrated and leave the exhibition in high dudgeon.
I appreciate that helping disabled people is both difficult and costly. You may solve one problem, but create another. Designers of material for disabled people need to understand that we are not all confined to wheelchairs and that some way needs to be found to balance the needs of those in wheelchairs, with the visually impaired who happen to be tall.
Jeremy Michelson
Renaissance is here to stay
You are quite right to point to a disappointing funding settlement for MLA and regional museums in the recent Spending Review announcement (Museums Journal January 2005, p5). However, we thought it might be helpful to clarify the funding we had requested.
Renaissance already had an budget of £10m pa, doubling to £20m this year, and rising to £30m in 2005-06 (our 'baseline budget'). On top of this, we asked for £45m in 2006-07 and £65m the year after - that is, an extra £35m pa above our baseline, but not before 2007-08. £5m of this new funding was requested from sources other than DCMS.
In return for the extra investment, the collections, institutions, workforces, and most importantly, the audiences and communities across the nine regions of England on whose behalf we all work, would derive the benefits hitherto offered to three.
We're heading in the right direction, not at the pace we'd have liked, but still at a pace. We know that rebuilding our sector after more than a generation of decline will take time, and that budgets, capacity and delivery need to grow step by step.
It's testimony to just how far we've come that we are lamenting the fact that, through Renaissance, within a couple of years we'll have at least £45m flowing annually into England's regional museums from the DCMS.
Thanks to the achievements of museums across England working together as never before, the early results of that investment have won us a 50 per cent increase in support from the DCMS and, more importantly, established Renaissance as here for the long haul.
Over the coming months we are reviewing with museums and stakeholders how we've all implemented the programme so far and what we can improve in the future.
The fact is we are laying claim to funding streams that are unprecedented not only in terms of their source and purpose, but also their growth and, we hope, their longevity. Let's invest them wisely, growing and learning as we go, inspiring the communities we are here to serve - and, yes, let's make the case for more.
David Crowther, project director, Renaissance, Museums, Libraries and Archives Council
Museums held back by leisure services
Jane Morris's excellent editorial made sad and frustrating reading (Museums Journal January 2005, p4). That 'most people are reluctant to sound anything other than grateful and congratulatory' for the unfair balance of grants and budgets is true; the politicians hold the power and the purse strings and making a fuss only labels you as a troublemaker, with the fear you will get even less next time.
As a district councillor and a spokesman for museums for more than 16 years I feel strongly that locally funded museums and galleries will always struggle and suffer financially as long as they are generally lumped in under leisure and amenity services, along with swimming pools, football pitches and commemorative tree planting.
Sporting activities are visual and high profile, and have always been vote winners. I have always believed that if museums and galleries were transferred to education they could develop higher priorities and profiles with the general public who would see the benefits to their children, and this in turn would make elected politicians think more positively.
My only issue with the editorial was the criticism of the current government. It's the general attitude and thinking of politicians that has to change, not their broader political philosophies. Changes of government don't seem to help museums very much.
Tony Baker, AJB Designs, Harrogate
In the dark over museum lighting
Although I have not yet visited the Imperial War Museum North, I would like to comment on the observation of Mike Constable concerning the dark presentation (Museums Journal January 2005, p15).
This type of presentation is very widespread and unhelpful. Those with vision impairment find it distressing, and many with average vision detest it. Gallery blackout with spotlight highlights is the flavour of the month, eagerly seized on by designers, aided and abetted by conservators who see any form of light as a corroding influence on artefacts.
I am not advocating irresponsible display (or discounting spotlight technique where necessary) but there are other ways of solving these problems. I have bumped into, tripped over and fallen down steps in the blackout and been unable to read labels.
The minerals gallery in the Natural History Museum is an exemplary display of the use of natural light. It is open, clean and refreshing and not hemmed in by claustrophobic dimness.
Michael Clark, Maldon, Essex
Cameron Hawke-Smith's letter defies logic on two counts (Museums Journal February 2005, p15). Firstly, with no evidence other than the arbitrary selection of case studies, he appears to conclude that small museums in phase one hub regions are at greater risk than their contemporaries elsewhere.
Secondly, he questions museums emphasising 'the social benefits of their work'. Is there any justification for public funding of museums at all unless they provide social benefit? I suggest that the argument that museums are 'good things in themselves…' is best discarded as it is easily refuted by those who cannot see any good reason for their existence.
The nature of future public funding mechanisms for museums (of which Renaissance in the Regions is merely one example) is under constant review: it is one of the key questions in the minister's recently published document on the government's vision for museums. The way forward will rely on empirical evidence and informed discussion. Regrettably, Hawke-Smith's letter contributes towards neither.
Alec Cole, director, Tyne & Wear Museums
Where is all the new money going?
We were led to believe that the era of the Mlacs and the 'Renaissance' was going to result in higher standards and an injection of substantial amounts of money for the development and support of museum services throughout the country, including the small/medium-sized and less-well-funded museums.
It is my perception that the greater proportion of this new money seems to be supporting large regional bureaucracies and their consultants.
There seem to plenty of reports, strategies, benchmarking etc, but I am unclear whether there have been any quantifiable improvements to the quality of provision of museum services and the care of collections, over and above those that might have happened had this new money been distributed directly to museums.
Ian Edelman, web manager, recreation and heritage, Hampshire County Council
Questioning equal opportunities
Museums should be commended for their efforts to be socially inclusive. In the 21st-century they should not be the preserve of the white middle class. However, many pursuing a career in museums are being left frustrated by the few available training opportunities/bursaries being restricted to those from ethnic minorities.
I am sure many will relate to my numerous experiences of finding an advertised job that could prove to be an excellent starting point for my career, only to be prevented from applying because of the colour of my skin.
At this point I imagine many are gasping at my audacity or spouting legal jargon while those ignorant and naive enough will find it easier to label me racist than to try to empathise with my frustration. No, I am not racist. I have no objection to losing out on an opportunity, providing it was competed for on an even playing field.
I'm well aware that ethnic minorities are under-represented within the museum workforce. I fully understand how a more representative workforce can provide a more representative exhibition programme and service. But when traineeships and bursaries are few and far between it seems unfair to restrict most to ethnic minority applicants.
The museum industry is hard enough for anyone to break into and everyone should have the same opportunities.
Katie Parks
Balancing the needs of disabled visitors
I read with interest the article Seeing the Light (Museums Journal January 2005, p24). I am registered partially sighted, although I am comparatively fortunate in that I do see quite well in one eye. I am also tall and suffer from back trouble.
Imagine my chagrin when I visit certain museums to find that the paneling is at such a low level that I have to bend right down to read it. I cannot keep this up for long, so I end up frustrated and leave the exhibition in high dudgeon.
I appreciate that helping disabled people is both difficult and costly. You may solve one problem, but create another. Designers of material for disabled people need to understand that we are not all confined to wheelchairs and that some way needs to be found to balance the needs of those in wheelchairs, with the visually impaired who happen to be tall.
Jeremy Michelson
Renaissance is here to stay
You are quite right to point to a disappointing funding settlement for MLA and regional museums in the recent Spending Review announcement (Museums Journal January 2005, p5). However, we thought it might be helpful to clarify the funding we had requested.
Renaissance already had an budget of £10m pa, doubling to £20m this year, and rising to £30m in 2005-06 (our 'baseline budget'). On top of this, we asked for £45m in 2006-07 and £65m the year after - that is, an extra £35m pa above our baseline, but not before 2007-08. £5m of this new funding was requested from sources other than DCMS.
In return for the extra investment, the collections, institutions, workforces, and most importantly, the audiences and communities across the nine regions of England on whose behalf we all work, would derive the benefits hitherto offered to three.
We're heading in the right direction, not at the pace we'd have liked, but still at a pace. We know that rebuilding our sector after more than a generation of decline will take time, and that budgets, capacity and delivery need to grow step by step.
It's testimony to just how far we've come that we are lamenting the fact that, through Renaissance, within a couple of years we'll have at least £45m flowing annually into England's regional museums from the DCMS.
Thanks to the achievements of museums across England working together as never before, the early results of that investment have won us a 50 per cent increase in support from the DCMS and, more importantly, established Renaissance as here for the long haul.
Over the coming months we are reviewing with museums and stakeholders how we've all implemented the programme so far and what we can improve in the future.
The fact is we are laying claim to funding streams that are unprecedented not only in terms of their source and purpose, but also their growth and, we hope, their longevity. Let's invest them wisely, growing and learning as we go, inspiring the communities we are here to serve - and, yes, let's make the case for more.
David Crowther, project director, Renaissance, Museums, Libraries and Archives Council
Museums held back by leisure services
Jane Morris's excellent editorial made sad and frustrating reading (Museums Journal January 2005, p4). That 'most people are reluctant to sound anything other than grateful and congratulatory' for the unfair balance of grants and budgets is true; the politicians hold the power and the purse strings and making a fuss only labels you as a troublemaker, with the fear you will get even less next time.
As a district councillor and a spokesman for museums for more than 16 years I feel strongly that locally funded museums and galleries will always struggle and suffer financially as long as they are generally lumped in under leisure and amenity services, along with swimming pools, football pitches and commemorative tree planting.
Sporting activities are visual and high profile, and have always been vote winners. I have always believed that if museums and galleries were transferred to education they could develop higher priorities and profiles with the general public who would see the benefits to their children, and this in turn would make elected politicians think more positively.
My only issue with the editorial was the criticism of the current government. It's the general attitude and thinking of politicians that has to change, not their broader political philosophies. Changes of government don't seem to help museums very much.
Tony Baker, AJB Designs, Harrogate
In the dark over museum lighting
Although I have not yet visited the Imperial War Museum North, I would like to comment on the observation of Mike Constable concerning the dark presentation (Museums Journal January 2005, p15).
This type of presentation is very widespread and unhelpful. Those with vision impairment find it distressing, and many with average vision detest it. Gallery blackout with spotlight highlights is the flavour of the month, eagerly seized on by designers, aided and abetted by conservators who see any form of light as a corroding influence on artefacts.
I am not advocating irresponsible display (or discounting spotlight technique where necessary) but there are other ways of solving these problems. I have bumped into, tripped over and fallen down steps in the blackout and been unable to read labels.
The minerals gallery in the Natural History Museum is an exemplary display of the use of natural light. It is open, clean and refreshing and not hemmed in by claustrophobic dimness.
Michael Clark, Maldon, Essex
