Proposed Government Plan 2020–23: increase in revenue expenditure on the arts, heritage and culture [P.40/2019]

STATES OF JERSEY

PROPOSED GOVERNMENT PLAN 2020–23: INCREASE IN REVENUE EXPENDITURE ON THE ARTS, HERITAGE AND CULTURE

Lodged au Greffe on 4th April 2019 by Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade

STATES GREFFE

2019  P.40

PROPOSITION

THE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion

to agree that States' revenue expenditure on the arts, heritage and culture should be increased in the proposed Government Plan 2020–23 so that it reaches a target of 1% of overall States revenue expenditure by 2022; and to request the Council of Ministers to take the steps necessary to achieve this target in bringing forward the Government Plan.

DEPUTY M. TADIER OF ST. BRELADE

REPORT

In the course of this report, I will be quoting extensively from the BOP report entitled Jersey Culture, Arts and Heritage Strategic Review and Recommendations, which was produced and presented to the Minister for Economic Development, Tourism, Sport and Culture and his officers in February 2018; and which was subsequently made publicly available on 27th November 2018, at my request. The full report can be read here. Quotes from the original report will appear in italics.

BOP Consulting is an international consultancy business specialising in culture and the creative economy.

From here on in, Culture, Arts and Heritage will be referred to collectively as CAH. Investment in CAH

It should be a matter of real concern for anyone who values the contribution that Culture, Arts and Heritage make to Jersey life and the common good to learn that CAH have been underfunded for decades. The BOP report reminds us that –

funding has not kept pace with increasing costs, even being significantly cut at points, and this has significantly diminished the resources available. Compared to the Retail Price Index and taking 2010 as a base year, the value of the annual funding provided is now nearly £500,000 less than it was in 2010. Over the period, this is a total shortfall in funding of £2.3m (Figure 6). The Island's leading cultural organisations are constrained and threatened by this financial context. When comparing their earned income (e.g. via trading and trust giving) to their state funding, these organisations are broadly the same as comparators, with changing their model of delivery unlikely to release the significant funds required to bring them anywhere near comparators.

There were a total of 20 recommendations in the BOP report, all of which I believe have merit and I would commend them to Members. Out of the 20, two in particular relate to funding –

18. Commit to more realistic investment in CAH, which is appropriate to the contribution made by them to overall goals.
19. Identify the potential for new sources of funding for CAH activity.

The report gives context to these recommendations with the following findings –

Funding for CAH in Jersey is significantly lower than elsewhere, and this is constraining  the  ability  of  the  sector  overall  and  of  the  main  funded organisations to adapt and capitalise on opportunities.

The total culture budget from Government in 2016 was £4,787,600, or 0.68% of  total  Government  expenditure.  Data  is  provided  by  the  European Commission for expenditure on cultural services across Europe. The European Union average for cultural services expenditure is 1% of total government expenditure.

Further on, the report states –

Until this point, the presence and activities of most of the CAH community organisations has gone beneath the radar and without acknowledgement of Government. These groups are operating on shoestring budgets – through small grants, limited commercial sponsorship, membership and ticket fees, and –  in  many  cases –  funds  coming  directly  out  of  the  pockets  of  their organisers.

Implications of diminishing funding

The slow decline in funding to current levels has a range of consequences. Efficiencies have been found long ago, and now the limitations are constraining the delivery of services much further, and especially the capacity of the organisations to adapt and develop.  They  already  show  high  levels  of  earned  income  in  comparison  with benchmarks. This slow reduction of funding also provides poor value for money in the long-term. For organisations and programmes, any loss of funding means that failures require significant investment to restart. For example, to establish a new organisation is often  more  expensive  than  to  maintain  or  continue  an  existing  one.  For  capital investment (particularly in heritage), providing a reasonable level of maintenance ultimately  provides  significantly  better  value  for  money  than  the  required  total refurbishment which will inevitably be needed. For example, in the case of a historic church the total real cost of annual maintenance is around 64% of the cost of more substantial restoration every fifteen years.12

Critically, there is a real threat of the potential loss of valued services, as they struggle to adapt to new and unforeseen challenges. See example of the Jersey Arts in Healthcare Trust – a high-quality programme whose future is uncertain due to financial constraints.

Case study: Jersey Arts in Healthcare Trust

Jersey Arts in Healthcare Trust consequences highlight the potential fragility of the sector in Jersey.

Since 1993, the Jersey Arts in Health Care Trust has been working to bring arts and culture to disabled persons, those in poor health in the Island, and the elderly across the Island.

Recognising the overwhelming evidence demonstrating the therapeutic and healing benefits of arts and cultural activities, the initiative has brought live music and artworks to residents across the Island both in the community and within  healthcare  settings.  In  2016  Music  in  Hospitals  brought  over 150 concerts spanning piano, guitar, dance band, vocals, cello and multi- instrumental folk to over 40 care settings including residential and care homes, day-care centres and hospital wards.

The project has also worked to expand knowledge and discourse on the health benefits of the arts through residencies, workshops, training sessions and talks. The project has historically been supported by the Health and Social Services Department, the Association of Jersey Charities, the Parish of St. Helier , Music in Hospitals, the Jersey Arts Trust, and the Bedell Trust, but due to funding constraints  the  initiative's  programming  has  been  put  on  hold  for  the foreseeable future.

I for one, am saddened that the Arts in Healthcare programme has had to cease due to a lack of funding, as the benefit of it is so obvious to most people.

Whilst it is true that more CAH need more than just money to ensure a prosperous future and their rightful place in Jersey society, the evidence is clear that significant new government investment will be needed.

Recommendation #18:  To  develop  a  more  realistic  investment  in  CAH organisations, which is appropriate to the contribution made by them to overall goals.

The case for Towards Action

Compared to the benchmarks we have considered, funding for CAH in Jersey is very low, notwithstanding the value of the contributions secured by the funded organisations. These organisations report ongoing underfunding which limits their ability to adapt to new contexts, seize opportunities, or plan for the long term. These are similar issues to those noted in the 2005 Cultural Strategy and the picture has changed little.

Lack of funding has resulted in a number of high-profile failures (such as the loss of the  Branchage Film Festival as  set out overleaf); and there  is a significant danger, especially given the bare-bones provision in the Island, that continued shortfalls in funding would mean further critical and embarrassing failures.

A new approach to funding to be determined with reference to a proportion of Government's  overall  budget  and  based  on  similar  levels  to  comparable administrations. This approach would set a basic minimum for service delivery and recognize reasonable limits to the capacity for earned income.

Given the significant and evident contribution that CAH can make in addressing many  aims,  the  lack  of  investment  is  a  missed  opportunity  because  the organisations  on  which  Government  currently  depends  are  not  resourced sufficiently to address many of those aims.

Lack of investment in maintenance is likely to result in poor value for money in the long-term, especially with regards to the Jersey Heritage maintenance grant which  has  been  reduced  significantly  since  it  was  introduced,  following recommendations by the Comptroller and Auditor General14.

The shortfall in investment has not been the result of dramatic cuts to funding, indeed the Assistant Minister for Culture successfully resisted inherited cuts: it is the result of a low base level of funding, determined by historic grant agreements, the subject of slow diminution of value over time.

14 Office

I hope that Members can back this ambitious, but essential proposition, to make sure that Culture, Arts and Heritage are no longer seen as the poor relation in terms of Government funding priorities, and that their true value, economically, socially and diplomatically, can be truly maximized.

Financial and manpower implications

Based on 2016 figures, an increase from 0.68 of the Budget to 1% would amount to a figure of £2.3 million per annum. The exact figure would depend on the overall budget for 2020–2023. It would also be for the Minister for Treasury and Resources to decide whether the overall budget were increased to fund further investment in CAH, or whether budgets were reprioritised.