We must defend the arts against right-wing cuts

Keynes was both a serious Liberal and a serious man. His work in two world wars and their aftermath is the stuff of legend. His contribution to economic thinking, recently somewhat vindicated, makes him a giant. Bertrand Russell found him intellectually formidable.

But he also built the Cambridge Arts Theatre and was the first Chairman of the Arts Council, created by the postwar Labour Government.

It would be too easy to say merely that a great man needs a hobby like anyone else. The Classical world and civilisation since have shunned the suggestion that somehow culture was an add-on, like sitting down to watch the X factor after a tiring week. Greek culture was defined by Homer. The Romans (or at least the ones who wrote about these things) saw beyond ‘bread and circuses’.

So the gathering of cultural luminaries in the House of Lords last week was not, by any measure, just a ‘jolly’. Familiar faces from film, old rockers and young soul performers rubbed shoulders with television actors, impresarios and even a specialist in high fashion jewelry.

Jane Bonham-Carter had organised, with the assistance of Nick Clegg’s office, something which was as much a political statement as a chance to see and be seen. Yes: the Party was launching a policy statement ‘The Power of Creativity’. More importantly it was making a statement that the arts matter. And that cultural people can and should support the Liberal Democrats.

Nick’s speech, covered last week in brief on LDV, was especially significant. In it he gave a clear pledge to maintain arts funding at current levels – something increasingly doubtful in the other two main parties, bent on cuts while sparing the largest spending departments the trouble of even modest belt-tightening. He also reminded us that the cultural sector was capable of new industries like video games, in which we have a considerable competitive advantage.

Culture is not an add-on. Nor is it a Disney theme park. It is a vital part of the life of the nation and of local communities. So when a right wing think tank suggests that a cut of 50% in cultural spending would not be noticed and when local council budget-making targets the arts development officer rather than the costly managers to whom he or she reports, it is time to speak up loudly.

Nick did this and hundreds were there to hear him. Let us hope that the Federal Policy Committee, which likes to remind us of how important it is in producing the Party’s General Election manifesto, was listening.

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Advert

30 Comments

  • Second time today I’ve agreed with you Tom!

    This is either very worrying for one of us – or we are really really right!

  • Chris, this is absolutely spot-on. There is an eonomic argument against cutting this:

    – 10% of the UK’s economy comes from the creative economy. This is the highest proportion in the world, and it will contribute massively to paying off our debt. It is also the only part of the economy to grow during the recession.

    – estimates of wealth creation put the ‘arts’ as putting at leats £2 into the economy for every £1 invested (£3 according to our Don Foster, and £5 according to the probably a bit over-optimistic government figures).

    – the budget of DCMS, rightly, is about 1% that of the NHS, to cut this, and to cut the lottery funding of the Arts Councils (which of course is highly contentious) would damage our economy significantly – this would then inevitably have a knock-on impact on front-line services which are obviously more important.

    – the Arts are currently funded through a ‘mixed-economy’ model, benefiting education (improving literacy, maths etc…), the economy directly, and the health service indriectly (for example music therapy and preventative treatment is a significant professional choice). Cut the central funding: you cut the sector, and you cut 10% of the economy.

    I think the commitment to maintaining that funding is a good thing.

    I agree with Tom that Chris’ article seems to promote an Adorno-like model of ‘elitism’ and ‘high art’. But this is not actually the case, and it would be nice if you could like Greek sculpture and know about Homer without being or likened to an ‘elitist Conservative’.

  • Kevin Jones 10th Feb '10 - 9:10pm

    Of course if we had followed the LibDem policy of joining the Euro in 2000 there would be 25% cuts in Arts funding as part of an ECB/IMFsupport package

  • Malcolm Todd 11th Feb '10 - 9:56am

    I have to agree with the so-called “right-wing cutters” here. I’m a big fan of subsidised theatre and opera, but I’ve never been comfortable with the principle of it. People make art, governments don’t. I doubt there is much connection between state subsidies for opera houses and modern art galleries, and the revenue-earning “creative industry” of Darth Cowell and the like.

    Politically, I think it’s peculiar that we’re prepared to take the sensible, brave, but very risky stance of saying that you can’t ring-fence health (health!) spending from public sector austerity, then follow that up with “a clear pledge to maintain arts funding at current levels”. If government is about priorities, I know where mine would lie.

    Incidentally, Henry: “it would be nice if you could like Greek sculpture and know about Homer without being or likened to an ‘elitist Conservative’.”
    It’s not liking Greek sculpture or Homer that makes one seem like an ‘elitist Conservative’; it’s believing that the X-Factor-and-football-loving masses should pay for your enjoyment of them.

  • Malcolm, I am part of the football-loving-masses in that regard, and contrary to the assumption that I enjoy Greek Sculture and Homer, I know little about them 🙂

    The point I was making was that Chris was unfairly criticised as being an ‘elite Conservative’ simply for mentioning Homer and Greek Sculpture in his argument – this would not have happened had he referenced other works.

    I welcome the commitment to maintenance of funding precisely because it supports the whole range of art from popular to less-popular at a basic, but high-quality level. I think this sits well with liberalism.

    And of course health is clearly more important, that is why I talked about the economic and health benefits of art rather than any ‘intrinsic value’ it may or may not have.

    Jock, (my name is Henry by the way), we could go into more detail, and no doubt that opportunity will arise at some point. You are right that I do “not of course prove that [the creative economy] would not geneerate £1, £2 or £4 respectively without taking the £1 from us”. But there is an argument there.

    And you are right about my ‘two non-sequiturs’ but there is an argument there as well. I just reached the stage of ‘efficient summary rather than whole essay’ 🙂 You’re right it wouldn’t all disappear, that was exaggeration…

  • I apologise for the use of ‘smileys’.

  • (A real) Harry 12th Feb '10 - 6:50am

    Compared to the amount of money being spent on culture, it would be foolish to cut. There are many benefits to art and beauty beyond the economic, and if government did one thing, it should be about culture.

    So Malcolm implies his priority would be health – I must disagree. We must ask what kind of society we want. Living to old age, but in fake meaningless commerciality is not my idea of a good life.

  • Paul Jenkins 12th Feb '10 - 7:11am

    I am suprised that so many on this thread are being so short sighted about cuts in the the arts. The coverage of the power of creativity last week inspired me to start blogging myself so I won’t go into too much detail here, but if you’ve got 10 mins spare, you can have a look at what I dribbled on about in my first post.

    http://orangemarauder.wordpress.com/

    And for those who haven’t got time/can’t be doing with that – I agrree with Chris!

  • Malcolm Todd 12th Feb '10 - 8:24am

    I liked your post on your own blog, Paul, and I’m puzzled that you seem to think that that vibrant, flourishing world of drama you describe would vanish if tax money wasn’t propping it up. Being a bit of an old leftie (and, to reveal my dark secret, a bit of an am-drammie), I don’t mind a certain amount of support for community-based art and theatre – and I certainly wouldn’t suggest ending drama teaching in schools 🙂 ; but there’s a huge step up from there to spending millions of pounds raised involuntarily on minority pursuits that apparently can’t raise the money from their own patrons. Sometimes ‘commercialism’ (or ‘commerciality’ – not quite sure what the difference is, but I like the word, Harry) is just a dirty word for ‘putting your money where your mouth is’.

    Obviously, withdrawing all state support overnight would have a catastrophic effect, and we’re not in such a dire situation that we should think about doing that. But the idea that state funding for art should be exempt from cuts when life and limb services are not makes my head spin.

  • Malcolm Todd 12th Feb '10 - 8:28am

    Just seen Jock’s post. While I don’t agree with the old anarchist on much, I think he summed up the point nicely with this:

    Culture is a *social* issue and not a *state* issue

    Unlike Jock, I think some things are “state” issues; but culture very much isn’t.

  • Malcolm Todd 12th Feb '10 - 8:47am

    Ah, yes, ignorance and incompetence are caused by the state. What did the Romans ever do for us? If it weren’t for the state, I never would have been so rude as to throw the word ‘old’ in your gleamingly youthful direction. Sincere, state-subsidised (if I can wangle it) apologies… 😉

  • Malcolm Todd 12th Feb '10 - 9:30am

    “Sunrise”? Surely that belongs to the arts, if anything does!

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Katharine Pindar
    Suzanne, I absolutely agree with you, and am shocked that I am not aware of a statement from our party condemning the new policy of people deemed to have entere...
  • Paul R
    “That means guaranteeing fair wages, empowering communities to shape the policies that affect their lives, and fostering a culture of accountability” The...
  • Mary Fulton
    So increases in income tax and cuts to large part of the public sector? Sounds like a recipe to ensure Reform UK builds its support even further…...
  • Ellyott
    The strange aspect is that the UK functioned relatively better, in terms of getting houses built, labour intensive industries, much bigger numbers in the armed ...
  • Linda Chung
    Vince - a great article, wide ranging and thought provoking. Even more interesting are the comments - but I find the China-bashing a bit superficial. Linda Ch...