further proof of a government that doesn’t ‘value’ the arts

If we are to believe the front page of the Sunday Times this week we are about to see another assault on our values as a country in which a government hell bent on promoting a narrow curriculum demonstrates, once again, that it has a willful disregard for the people who nurture and care for the quality of life of the country and for our long term economic future. A government that seems incapable of making judgements based on anything other than vote capture and simplistic notions of value for money.

In summary the article suggests a reduction in University fees to £7,500 from £9,250, cutting the 6.1% interest rate on student loans and raising the threshold at which repayment start to £25000. Which all sounds very good. (One can only guess at the spur for this change of heart – could it be a response to Labours proposals in the last election?)

However there is a catch.

The government is only proposing to protect the funding of science and technology degree courses – on the spurious grounds that they cost more money to deliver and provide higher graduate pay. But there is no such protection for arts subjects – which can be equally expensive to deliver – because they don’t represent ‘value for money’.

This is pernicious, fiscally irresponsible and downright daft policy from a government incapable of differentiating between value and money.

They claim it’s based, in part, on the dubious argument that some universities have large surpluses. You can be sure that this isn’t the case of all universities and particularly specialist arts schools and drama colleges where most of the high quality creative arts education is taught. Where is the evidence that arts courses are cheap to run? Take a look at the cost of the craft disciplines, or rehearsal and production costs for dance and drama students or the technology to support film and animation courses. I dont buy it.

Based on this approach, what reaction might this have in the range of disciplines that Universities teach in the future. Will the creative arts be valued as equal and essential partners of science and technology, supporting the nation’s industrial strategy?  Not very probable. Vice-Chancellors are unlikely to seek to retain the relatively high cost base and lower fee levels of creative arts courses if this policy goes through. Nevermind one in ten new jobs are in the Creative Industries or that the sector is outperforming every other in terms of growth.

More baffling is the argument that tuition fees ought to be equated to graduate earnings. There are many professions that are highly valued but that may not attract high earnings. The creative industries stimulate the economy in extraordinary ways, support the creation and regeneration of places and enrich and improve the quality of lives. They are generative and produce employment (currently 1.8 million people work in the creative industries). Why are graduate earnings the tool of policy makers? Surely there is a wider and more important context? Surely we should value what the creative arts bring to UK economy, society and culture and recognise what it takes to educate and support the emerging artist, designer, maker (the majority of which are degree educated). It is a nonsense to equate fees to graduates earnings.

I worry that scant regard is being given to the teaching of a set of disciplines that encourage questioning, independent thinking, vision and imagining how the world might better.

keep the conversation going

I have been talking to Surrey County Council for ten years now about working together. there have been lots of days when i – and i am sure they – have scratched our heads as to why or what we were trying to make happen. i have, on occasions cursed them – usually i admit because they are different from me and work differently. But, but, but something has finally flourished.

For the past couple of years Surrey County Council has had a freeze on appointments across the authority, which has meant they haven’t had someone in a part time role within the Arts Team. When the opportunity came for them to reappoint to that post the head of the arts team came and asked if we would be interested in a conversation about turning the part time role into a full time post that might accommodate a shared ambitions. It became a conversation not about money but about purpose. About what the two organisations are trying to achieve. Which has resulted in us creating a Surrey Performing Arts Officer post, based with us, working across the County. This role will look to support the County’s independent theatre makers, strengthening a venue network and identifying opportunities for people to participate in making their own performance. If we succeed then we both feel we will have made a real contribution to our own ambitions and to the place we work. Sharing a post means we have expanded our sphere of influence, grown our networks and will have more resources to call upon. More than this, the process of developing the partnership has helped us both to reaffirm our own purpose. Which surprised me.

As i say we have been talking regularly over a few years about how we might work more collaboratively. Which is the first lesson I guess. It takes time and there will be occasions when you will think nothing is ever going to happen. But the world changes around us and, eventually, the moment will occur when something becomes possible because agendas have aligned. So we should keep the conversation going way past when you might stop at a party.

When it came to it, we realised that both of us were going to have to give power away in order to get to somewhere new. I think this is particularly hard for Local Authorities who are used to setting agendas and contracting services. And we know the partnerships based on putting aside differences to get to the money never last past the money. What this became has been a case of finding the things we share that we could both invest in. What we ended up with something different from what both of us started with. it required us not to have an obvious solution.

As always it has taken trust and care to get to a point when we were both prepared to take a risk on each other. And there is still a hint of taking a risk. but its worth it.

We will be advertising the new role in arts jobs and on our website from 18^th September.