Welsh National Committee of Equity cannot support the proposals contained in the Draft Drama Strategy because the Committee do not believe that they will work in the interests of professional practitioners in Wales.
The Drama Strategy and the ACW Draft Corporate Plan contain a cluster of positive phrases:
ACW is keen that employment opportunities for Welsh artists be maximised.
The proposals include creating substantial long term employment opportunities for theatre artists
ACW's aims to build a strong community of artists in Wales
However we can only conclude that the Strategy as outlined can only result in the opposite
The hard facts are that only one client currently funded by ACW is to be guaranteed additional resources - Clwyd Theatre Cymru. Those resources, around £200k per annum, will hopefully bring some further employment but building based operations are notorious in soaking up funding through overheads and touring costs. The last beneficiaries of additional resources are the actors.
The closure of eight TIE companies and the creation of four new franchises is something Equity cannot support. The Union has spent much of its time over the last 15 years campaigning, lobbying and fighting for the continued existence of these companies. To accept that the work of many dedicated individuals who have given the best part of a lifetime to the TIE movement in Wales should be cast aside is anathema.
The idea that this work is past its best or is old fashioned and out of touch is ridiculous and does not bear any critical scrutiny. Indeed, they are the only companies that meet the government's current priorities for an inclusive and holistic approach to the arts.
Equity does not deny that the sector has problems, almost entirely financial, but restructuring was not the only option. The Arts Council could have decided to increase investment in this work and stabilise what up to how has been the only national coherent dram a policy in Wales. The Strategy gives no reasons why that option has been rejected.
There is every reason to believe that the four new companies will be less financially stable than the current eight. The ACW investment will be proportionately less, but of much more concern is the virtual certainty that the remaining Local Authority money will be put in jeopardy. Equity has heard from a number of companies that their Local Authorities knew nothing of these plans in advance and have therefore had no prior consultation. How can the Arts Council expect within such a short timescale the Local Authorities to embrace a new structure when virtually no discussion has been held with them about it? Whatever the outcome the result as far as practitioners are concerned will be less jobs. Core funding of £720k will not compensate for the loss of jobs from eight companies particularly those of directors, stage management and designers. How can the Arts Council justify damaging the skills base in this way?
ACW reports have often commented on the lack of career paths for directors for example in Wales. Is that to be remedied by abolishing half the available jobs?
Arts Council officers in the meeting with the Welsh National Committee claimed that the enhancement of job opportunities was a long term policy. That is not good enough. It will certainly not satisfy the practitioners who are desperate for work now. The loss of talent from Wales will accelerate because there are no real job prospects on offer in this country. The brilliant group of young Welsh actors who have emerged over the last five years have done so despite the situation in Wales not because of it.
The ACW Corporate Plan identifies a £633k budget to support individual artists. That money should be invested in companies so that the artists can be given work, which is the only way they can do justice to their status as professionals. Equity is also extremely concerned at the emphasis being put on project f funding No project funded company in Wales uses standard ITC or TMA contracts and the simple reason for that is that the project grants offered b y ACW never meet the needs of project companies in standard employment terms rms.
Project funding is notorious as 'sweatshop' funding - it always has been and it always will be unless the Arts Council is prepared to give guarantees, which they are prepared to police, that within the new Strategy this will not happen. Equity has seen two contracts offered by project clients within the last month: one offered a weekly salary £65 below the lowest union minimum rate and the other contained a clause requiring the actors to pay back their salary at the end of the contract to the employer. Is this the type of work practice ACW want to encourage? Obviously it isn't, so what safeguards are ACW prepared to introduce? It is equally important to know if the franchise process is to be by tender and if so will ACW take into account the terms and conditions of work being offered by the tendering companies? What is to prevent a non-union company winning a franchise on the basis of being able to provide an impressive business plan through not having to pay their personnel a decent living wage ?
It should also be stressed because this point did not seem to be fully understood at the WNC Meeting, that operating to professional standards is not solely and wholly about paying £250 a week; it is also about the hours of work, illness, overtime and other terms and conditions which in total provide a civilised and responsible working environment.
Equity's concerns at the status of the Welsh language Welsh National Performing Arts Company should also be noted. The Strategy appears to accept at the outset that it will be "inferior" to that of its English language counterpart. The Welsh speaking community find this very hard to accept and would remind the Arts Council that the needs of Welsh language practitioners is of parallel importance given the dedication of many of them to Wales as a result of the opportunities crated through the theatre and television industries
Equity also believes that the Sherman Theatre has to be maintained as a producing theatre as it would be utterly unacceptable for the capital not to have one building based production company. How that may be achieved, that is by redefining its role and/or by active collaboration with other companies be they New Writing or TYP or whatever, is a matter for further discussion.
The status of Cardiff under the Strategy's proposals is of major concern. There is a question mark over the Sherman and over Theatr Iolo, the revenue support to Brith Gof and the Magdalena Project is to cease, and most disturbing of all so is that to Hijinx. Cardiff has the highest concentration of practitioners and there will be virtually no jobs on offer.
The ACW Draft Corporate Plan incorporates a number of targets. There is however no target for actor weeks or any other employment yardstick. The promises inherent in the rhetoric would be more meaningful to Equity if employment targets had also been set and we urge ACW to revisit this issue. We would also wish to reiterate our concern over the failure of ACW' s advocacy policy. This has led to a continuing downward spiral of Local Authority support and has resulted in an unsatisfactory settlement from the Welsh Office at a time when the ACE and the Arts Council in Scotland have been able to make real progress. Has the Welsh Arts Council any explanation for why the arts in Wales has been so badly supported in comparison?
The repeated statement of intent that ACW will continue to search out and encourage new partnerships is wearing thin as it has appeared almost annually for the last five years, and has yet to have any meaningful effect. We believe that the only opportunity to redress the situation lies in the National Assembly. We would urge the Arts Council to put these radical proposals on hold until the Assembly comes into existence so that the Assembly itself can decide, for example, whether it still wants a nationwide TIE/TYP service, and if so how increased resources can be found to achieve that. What would be damaging for the arts is a disunited industry, but if these proposals stay in place that is extremely likely as we shall have little alternative but to make the Strategy an issue during the Assembly elections. If however the Strategy was put on hold we would be only too willing to join with the Arts Council in a concerted attempt to bring about some real improvement in the funding situation.
Finally, Equity is anxious to clarify the level of increase available to ACW given the conflicting figures ranging from 2.48% to over 3%. We want to establish that the drama budget is not being disadvantaged. That situation now seems even less clear as since our meeting drama clients affected by the Strategy (which must be virtually all of them) have received standstill grant offers. This has come as a major surprise given that they were budgeting on 3% or thereabouts and expected to receive 2.5%.
Equity immediately contacted two companies in Cardiff not subject to major restructuring, Made in Wales and The Sherman. Made in Wales said one entire project would have to be dropped and The Sherman said that further cuts in actor weeks were now being proposed. How can this situation possibly sit alongside the aspirations of ACW to increase employment opportunities.
Every action by ACW in practice results in the opposite. There is every possibility that the Annual Open Meeting of the Union in Cardiff in March will pass a vote of no confidence in ACW to represent and act in the best interests of practitioners in Wales. If any of the senior personnel at ACW wish to address that meeting, please let me know. It will be difficult to manage at this late stage but it would be worth considering given the opening comments in this letter. We do not want the Arts Council to dismiss the response of Equity on the basis that it is in some way unrepresentative.
|
