ACE under fire

The Select Committee Inquiry into the Funding of Arts and Heritage has stated that Arts Council England (ACE) is “open to criticisms that its selection process lacked rigour”, ahead of the announcement of its new National Portfolio Organisations on Wednesday. In its newly published report, based on evidence from hundreds of arts organisations and arts commentators, the committee raises concerns at “how great an administrative task it is to assess all the applications for the National Portfolio, and to draw up funding agreements in the two months that the Arts Council has set itself.” The report also questions the validity of some of the criteria for making its selection: “in using the financial sustainability of an organisation as a criterion for funding… arts organisations which are already struggling may find it even harder to make their case for funding.”

ACE comes in for a battering from the committee, standing accused of “not supporting arts organisations… as well as it should” in grant applications; of not doing enough to publicise, loan or display its public art collection; and of playing “a major role in a gross waste of public money” during its involvement with The Public gallery in West Bromwich project. The report says that although the problems with The Public occurred under the previous management, “the inability of the current Chief Executive to provide answers to our questions or demonstrate any serious attempts to learn lessons from the failure of the project, does not inspire confidence in the Arts Council or its leadership.”

In other areas, though, ACE and its leadership were praised. The committee notes that “The Arts Council has undergone considerable change in recent years and has already cut its administration budget by over 50%.” However, although it recognised that the further 50% reduction demanded by the DCMS “will be hard to achieve, particularly given the extra responsibilities that the Arts Council is taking on”, it does not dispute that this is necessary, and suggests that it is also achievable: “The fact that the Arts Council was able to make such significant reductions in spending on its own administration while still functioning well as an organisation indicates it was previously spending far too much on itself.” The report also suggests that ACE reviews its policy of not selling its art works, particularly as the value of the collection has risen in recent years: “At a time when the Arts Council is under serious financial pressures, strategic de-accessioning could make the Collection more dynamic and financially sustainable, as well as help fund the operation costs of increasing its loans.”

One of the most specific recommendations that the report makes is about orchestras: “We are not convinced of the need for so many subsidised orchestras, whether by the Arts Council or the BBC. We recommend that the Arts Council and the BBC work together to identify areas of duplication and options for joint-working.” If this recommendation is taken on board, it could see significant changes to the orchestral landscape.

The report is critical of decisions by ACE to remove funding for Arts&Business, saying it is “concerned that the Arts Council lacks the experience and enthusiasm successfully to take on this role”; and by the DCMS to remove funding from the UK Film Council and to abolish the MLA and the Public Lending Right body, saying “we do not see any persuasive reason for the Government’s decision to abolish [the MLA]… it is unrealistic to expect that the Arts Council can carry out the role as effectively”, and that it is “disappointed that DCMS did not discuss the future of the PLR with its Registrar before announcing its abolition. It follows the same disturbing modus operandi as with the other bodies, including the UK Film Council. We have not found anyone who supports this decision.”

In its response to the report, ACE has expressed appreciation for the Committee’s backing for the new National portfolio, but described the report as being “out of date in places”, and said it “could have benefited from a wider range of viewpoints from the oral witnesses.” It dismissed criticisms relating to The Public as “old news, and is not representative of the Arts Council’s investments in capital projects”, and said that “selling off works of art from the Arts Council Collection is also not a sensible solution to the current budget cuts.”