|
The Wales Association for the Performing Arts (WAPA) is the principal umbrella organisation for the professional performing arts in Wales. The Association takes its representative role extremely seriously and has addressed the recently published Draft Drama Strategy by calling together constituent members to a Special meeting in Rhayader. Those members after a long and detailed debate voted overwhelmingly to reject the Strategy because they believe it is not in the best interests of the performing arts in Wales, and more importantly, because it will not deliver to Wales the aims and objectives which the Arts Council has itself laid down within the Strategy, the Draft Corporate Plan and in other recent policy documents The principal factor influencing the decisions of the Drama Strategy is the inadequate increase in government funds following the outcome of the Welsh Office Comprehensive Spending Review. The Arts Council must recognise that the jobs and companies now under threat have been put in that position by its own failure to secure the necessary central government funding, in stark contrast to its counterparts in Scotland and England. WAPA believes that this failure can only be remedied by the adoption of a vigorous, robust and public advocacy policy in the run up to, and in the early stages of, the National Assembly. In Hansard of 4th February, Dafydd Wigley is recorded as asking the Secretary of State for Wales what representation he had received concerning the level of funding announced to ACW. The written reply was that he has received "no representations". Can it be the case that ACW have made no approach to the Welsh Office following the announcement? (The Arts community immediately asked for a face to face meeting and that is to take place on March 8 th) It is also a matter of immense concern to us that having been asked to take part in the creation of an advocacy policy as long ago as November 1997, no policy has yet been produced. The Scottish Arts Council by contrast had a manifesto for a National Cultural Strategy for Scotland in the public domain in the middle of last year and was able to produce that with the collaboration of a number of key partners including Scottish Screen and local authorities WAPA believes that ACW should join with other organisations like ourselves, GALW, PAG, TMA, UC and the media unions in a concerted attempt to persuade the National Assembly to re-prioritise the Arts in Wales and the funding given thereto in the next three years. In the meantime no decisions should be taken to close or merge revenue clients as once lost, their skills and expertise will be irretrievable and irreplaceable. Having stated our principled position,, WAPA still believes that we have a duty to make specific and detailed comments on the Draft Strategy and these are set out below: 1. The "Arts and Young People" report published last autumn was widely welcomed. Implicit in it was the need for improved access to the arts for young people. The proposals in the Drama Strategy to restructure the provision of TIE and TYP will not deliver that objective. The Arts Council believes that the new proposals will "ensure adequate support for young people". WAPA members want to know what "adequate" means in this context. We believe that ACW should be striving for excellence not adequacy. The provisional target of 57k young people set out in the Draft Corporate Plan to be reached during 2001/2002 is less than half the figure currently being achieved by the existing eight companies. A Strategy which on the one hand claims to increase access while at the same time is setting targets at less than half the existing level is not a credible Strategy. 2. Although ACW are claiming that the financial commitment to the four new companies will be no less than its support for the current eight, there remains confusion and uncertainty. How has the franchise figure of £180k been arrived at? It is at face value less than the total current spend, and the assumption is that ACW have redefined the current grants and taken out some proportion for non ~E/TYP work. But this is not clear and needs to be explained in detail. There is also a discrepancy in figures between the Strategy and the Corporate Plan where the £720k becomes £836k. If the additional figure is purely to cover transitional costs, it is extremely high. Additionally there is the very real possibility that the remaining Local Authority funding will be lost. The Authorities which remain loyal to their TIE companies do so because of the very close working relationship which has grown up between them. If this is severed by the creation of four new franchises working presumably over much larger areas, far from achieving the goal of "establishing a new planning framework with Local Authorities", the Arts Council will have destroyed the existing framework and in the process further destabilised the TIE/TYP sector. The companies feel strongly that if, as the Arts Council maintain, these plans have been in the pipeline for some time, more information about the nature, size and geographical remit of the franchise areas should have been made public. There is no space provided in the published timetable for the companies to make further representation on this issue. That is not satisfactory. We want the' opportunity to be involved in the franchise discussions, as we feel strongly that the people best placed to advise are those in the field doing the work. 3. The companies believe the nine month transitional period to be unacceptable, and moreover, unworkable. No trading organisation operates on such a cycle; to quote from the minutes of one Local Authority: "the timescale in which the proposed changes would be carried out takes little account of Local Authority budgetary processes." WAPA urges ACW to rethink this timescale. In the event that all eight TIE companies have to close, no figure has been identified as necessary to meet winding up, redundancy and severance costs. There is also no acknowledgment of the effect this may have on individual company's year plans. It may be that some companies will not be able to fulfill their autumn plans. Whatever sums of money are involved, they would be better used to create work, not to pay off some of the dedicated professionals who have given a considerable amount of their working lives to create a system of educational theatre which remains the envy of the rest of Britain and Europe. 4. There is a widespread feeling that ACW officers do not understand the administrative planning and the artistic processes needed in the present financial climate to make and present professional theatre. All companies are now firmly in the market place and have to plan and provide material at least a year in advance. This includes not just marketing but the commissioning of new work. The new franchise companies will have barely six months to negotiate with schools and local authorities, which is insufficient. Meanwhile existing companies are already putting plans forward and negotiating for specific projects. If the company concerned fails to achieve a franchise the prospect presents itself of grants having to be returned. 5. WAPA does not believe the Drama Strategy will deliver performing arts development in communities where access to the arts is low. ACW has identified the South Wales valleys and West Wales in particular as areas where development should be prioritised. There is nothing in the Strategy which will achieve this, and what development there has been through community touring and the TYP sector will be put at severe risk. 6. The Strategy has failed to convince the performing arts sector that there is a greater "synergy between-the use of Lottery and Grant in Aid". The professional arts has been consistent in campaigning for a greater priority to be given to activity based Lottery development at the expense of capital. The proposal that the current split should remain "for four to five years" is deeply disappointing and will serve to confirm to the professional sector that there is no new thinking being brought to ways in which companies can develop access and participation through Lottery funded projects. There is also no further mention of stabilisation. This has been used, and will continue to be used, in England and Scotland as a means of refocusing the work of professional companies. If ACW have a differing or alternative perspective on such funding then these arguments should be at the very least exercised within this Strategy. 7. The decision to withdraw funding from the one company which specialises in the area of disability is completely at odds with ACW's commitment to equal opportunities. It also throws into question the evolutionary process of the Strategy itself. "Building a Creative Society" laid down no markers for the withdrawal of support in this area, and there were no responses to that document which did so either. On what basis therefore can a recommendation of this nature arise when the consultation process has failed to identify it as an issue? 8. WAPA is extremely concerned at the implications for touring in the Drama Strategy. The only major increase in funding will be to Clwyd Theatr Cymru, but the additional £200k per year will not be sufficient to resource a significant increase in touring. The Torch is being required to tour for four weeks but with no additional funding. The four new TIE/TYP franchises have no community touring brief (as far as we know) and therefore alongside the closure of Hijinx, community touring in English will be non existent, and that in Welsh will be under threat. Indeed, apart from Clwyd it is hard to see where any sort of touring will come from. Yet this remains an ACW objective. WAPA does not believe that the Drama Strategy can deliver touring work of the highest quality at either middle or small scale levels. 9. There is a strong indication that some community touring, as well as other objectives, will be fulfilled by the enhanced use of project funding. Project funding can never fulfil a long term strategic role. It cannot deliver continuity and expertise. It is an unstable and insecure form of funding which requires a work commitment for periods well in excess of the time for which the funding is given. Project funding does not offer sustainability which is high on ACW's agenda, and is notorious for encouraging bad employment practice. WAPA does believe that a coherent project strategy is important but the expectations giVen to it in the Strategy are unrealistic and cannot be delivered on £400k per year. 10. The expectation that the Drama Strategy will deliver "substantial opportunities for long term employment" is equally unrealistic. In the short term the number of companies will reduce by a third and so immediately will directorial and administrative jobs. In the medium term the ambition is to reduce revenue clients by half which will further erode the skills base. The possibility for a substantial increase in actor weeks given the limited additional resources identified in the Strategy is wildly optimistic, and the likely result is that the haemorrhaging of talent out of Wales will not only not cease, it will increase. 11. WAPA is extremely surprised that there is no specific strategy for the capital city. There is no commitment to the provision of mainstream drama in Cardiff. It is suggested that there will need to be a review of performing arts provision in the city but no timescale is put on this, and if that is to be divorced from the main Strategy where is the cohesion? Meanwhile WAPA members are concerned at the imbalance in siting both Welsh National Performing Arts Companies in North Wales thus divorcing them from the major centres of population (i.e. audiences) and the major concentration of practitioners. 12. Members have drawn attention to the fact that the timetable accompanying the Draft Strategy does not provide for the publication of any Final strategy. This fuels concerns that the Draft and the Final strategy are one and the same document and that the consultative aspect of the process is a token one. 13. WAPA members are not resistant to change. Indeed they have needed to be accommodate, adapt and absorb endless changes in the last few years: Local Management of Schools, Local Government Reorganisation, copious pieces of legislation. The very ethos of theatre is to create and debate the nature of change. Many companies believe that there should be new thinking and new structures. They are however opposed to this type of change; its speed, its exclusivity and its unsuitability. WAPA wants a more inclusive and open debate involving practitioners and audiences. We believe that this Strategy should be put on hold for at least twelve months while that takes place. Within the last week drama clients have received offer letters confirming standstill funding to the vast majority. The suggested increase of 2.81% or 2.48% depending on which document is being referred to, has not been passed on to drama. Therefore drama within the Artform Development budget has actually been cut. WAPA members feel they have been misled about this and are extremely dissatisfied. This rubs salt in some already deep wounds. Some of the wounds could get deeper as the prospect of all eight existing TIE companies competing for the four franchises appears to be inevitable. Other companies fedi they are being pushed into collaborations on a take it or leave it basis. The outcome will be division and discontent. If the Arts Council believe that on the back of this high quality performance art can emerge, then WAPA believes they are much mistaken. |
| WAPA web site: www.waparts.org.uk |
| e-mail: |
Friday, February 26, 1999 |
Older news
stories have been carefully archived.
2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999