Letters

Raising the issue of Renaissance underspend

I would like to say thank you to Museums Journal for raising the issue of the Renaissance underspend and to the Museums Association (MA) for taking it up with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

I am not writing using my own name and do not feel confident in identifying which Renaissance region or museum I am writing from, but I am deeply involved with Renaissance and have day-to-day contact with the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA).

There has been a lot of negativity around the Renaissance programme but I feel that hub museums have done their best under the circumstances. The lack of good management and leadership of the programme have been deeply frustrating and has overshadowed some wonderful work and achievements that have benefited the collections, the audiences we work with, the professional skills of the sector and in supporting non-hub museums.

It has been a privilege to have received these funds and taken part in some exceptional projects.  However, I nearly keeled over at last year’s MA conference when the MLA had the nerve to say that its inefficiencies had been put behind it. This has been the most inefficient year to date.

Each year new ‘improvements’ are made to the way in which we report and collect data – each year this results in much additional and unnecessary work. While I am all for accountability and the collection of data that is then used usefully, this has at times detracted from the job at hand – delivering the Renaissance programmes.

I also feel that we live in a constant state of business planning. Renaissance has been patched together with one- and two-year business plans making it difficult to put together substantive programmes.  This also impacts on staff morale – each year we worry about whether we can renew contracts or not – which negatively affects our ability to provide continuity in our work.

This is not meant to sound like moaning but Renaissance museums are, perhaps rightly, made to work extremely hard for the money they receive. It is extremely political and full of red tape. However, many of us genuinely care about our regional role and the public benefits good-quality Renaissance programmes deliver.

A case study in inefficiency: This time last year in our region we were told to plan for cuts and then very late in the day we were told we had in fact received a substantial rise in funding and were given no useful time at the end of 2008/09 and the beginning of 2009/10 to submit new business plans for this money.

Our forecasts for spending and outputs were based on a full year’s spend, but many projects were delayed approval until December 2009, some even in the New Year. No wonder we have been unable to spend the money this year. But there are still real projects and programmes that this money could be spent on.

Name and address supplied

Museums Journal March 2010, p5

A parallel universe

I sometimes think I live in a parallel universe from the one apparently occupied by the Museums Association (MA). The media is dominated by stories of cuts in central government funding and the global economic crisis, but are these issues reflected in Museums Journal?

The March issue had stories of curators saving Iraq’s archaeology and museums collaborating to commemorate the sinking of the Titanic.

Is it me, or have initiatives like this got nothing to do with the experiences of the majority of Britain’s museum professionals? Local authorities operate most of the country’s museums and yet the cuts that will be suffered by councils and lead to job losses and reductions in service are not reflected in the journal.

I get the firm impression that the MA has no concept of how small museums operate on a daily basis. The forthcoming massive reductions in core funding will soon devastate Britain’s small museums.

The district council museum in which I work will soon be subject to huge cuts that will result in job losses of curatorial staff. I have been a museum professional for 20 years and I have never known the future to be so bleak.

To ignore these matters does the profession a disservice and will alienate the institutions that the MA relies on most for support.

Richard Davies, Lincolnshire

Ethically speaking

David Anderson is absolutely right to say that people who work in museums have to take their responsibilities to the people they serve seriously. But he is wrong to suggest that the Museums Association’s code of ethics has nothing substantial to say on this matter.

The code of ethics was revised with this purpose in mind: to put people at the centre of our professional practice.

At least eight of its ten key principles refer directly to museums’ relationships with their users and a serious commitment to public service runs through every paragraph. It does seem to be the case that, in their day-to-day work, museum professionals are much more likely to refer to the code when faced with a collections-related dilemma rather than with a question about public service.

It is hard to know who to blame for the sector’s failure to take the code to heart: it is clearly difficult to overcome entrenched perceptions. But the solution certainly isn’t a new charter; there’s nothing wrong with the code we’ve got, just the way it’s used.

Helen Wilkinson, independent consultant

Museums Journal March 2010, p17

N Ireland arts funding

I read with interest the article entitled N Ireland Arts in £1.1m Loss. I feel that it is important that I clarify the position in relation to arts funding for 2010/11.

The Northern Ireland Executive has been required to find savings in departmental budgets of £243m in current expenditure and £150m in capital investment. Following the review of 2010/11 spending plans across all departments, the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) is required to find savings of £5.9m in current expenditure and £20m in capital investment in 2010/11.

After careful consideration, proposed budget allocations have been drawn up which include a £1.1m reduction in the Arts Council of Northern Ireland’s revenue budget as compared to the indicative budget allocation previously quoted.

However, the arts council’s revenue budget would still increase from its 2009/10 opening position of £15.2m to £15.5m. And as part of the new proposed allocations, the arts council’s indicative capital allocation would increase significantly to £16.5m compared to the previous figure of £9.6m for 2010/11.

Overall, the total DCAL arts budget would increase to £34m in 2010/11 under the proposed new figures. This represents an uplift of over £3m when compared to the current position.

Some difficult funding decisions have been unavoidable given the current economic climate. However, the focus going forward must be on prioritisation, efficiency and effectiveness to ensure we make the best use of the funding available.

Nelson McCausland, minister of culture, arts and leisure

Museums Journal March 2010, p11

Correction

Bexhill Museum review: the exhibition design was by RFA Design, and not RDA Design as stated www.rfadesign.com

Museums Journal March 2010, p50