Looking back over the past month you could be forgiven for thinking: “Recession? What recession?”
Every time Margaret Hodge or Ben Bradshaw popped up, and they popped up a lot, they made an announcement about extra cash found to finish off a capital project (the Jewish Museum and Chatham Historic Dockyard), bail out a struggling museum (Wedgwood) or finance a depleted funding pot (the National Heritage Memorial Fund).
Of course there is political capital to be made from all these “good news” stories but it does make you wonder how strategic it is just to fling money at a rate of knots out of Cockspur Street.
For instance why give money to Bletchley Park (£250,000) and not National Museums Liverpool, which is still fundraising like crazy to finish off its £72m Museum of Liverpool (I’m sure it’s not because they didn’t ask).
There may be a logic behind the spending frenzy but if there is, it isn’t immediately apparent. For fear of repeating myself I hesitate to suggest that this is where a national museums strategy might come in handy.
That way there could be a rational assessment of need set against a strategic backdrop – rather than a last-minute panic accompanied by the sound of coffers being rapidly emptied.
Despite Hodge’s talk of ringfencing the arts budget just about the only post-election guarantee is that most museums are going to have less money to spend. In which case a national strategy setting out the priorities that museums should be aiming to achieve will be even more essential.
In the run up to the election there has been a deluge of advocacy documents raining down on those in power and those in waiting. The Cultural Capital manifesto counts Arts Council England, the National Museum Directors’ Conference and the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council among its signatories.
It’s heartening to see diverse institutions pulling together to make the case for culture; but why can’t that unity of effort be applied to a strategy?
Sharon Heal, editor