This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATES OF JERSEY
Education & Home Affairs Panel Hearing Cultural Strategy Review
TUESDAY, 5th OCTOBER 2010
Panel:
Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier (Vice Chairman) Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour
Witnesses:
Mr. C. Alluto (Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey) Ms. S. Lissenden (Member, National Trust for Jersey)
In Attendance:
Ms. S. Power (Scrutiny Officer)
[15:12]
Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier (Vice Chairman):
For the record I will get everyone to introduce themselves and, firstly, I will apologise that the panel has shrunk. It is now only the good looking members that are left; Deputy Le Hérissier is inflicted and Deputy M. Tadier is indisposed so I am Deputy Trevor Pitman of St. Helier No. 1, the vice chairman of the panel.
Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour : Deputy Jeremy Maçon of St. Saviour .
Ms. S. Power:
Sam Power, Scrutiny Officer.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Charles Alluto. I am C.E.O. (Chief Executive Officer) of the National Trust for Jersey.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Sue Lissenden, a member of the Council of the National Trust for Jersey and with past experience of quite a number of cultural organisations.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Thank you. I should say that perhaps you noticed the trick question we sent you about the funding, the huge amounts of annual grants that you receive.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey: Oh, yes, absolutely.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
So obviously we are happy that you talk at length on the things that, you know, you think are really important to you, but if we could start by you giving us your view on the Trust's relationship with the Department of Education, Sport and Culture that would help and please be as candid as you wish.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Well, until very recently we did not really have a relationship with Education, Sport and Culture of any substance or value but following election of James Reed as Minister there has been a new engagement with E.S.C. (Education, Sport and Culture) and I think that relates to the heritage sector as a whole. So we are now talking and actively engaging with the E.S.C., and this is in particular in relation to Stephen Harris on's report, which was prepared in the middle of this year. I think really it also came out of the crisis or financial crisis that Jersey Heritage was facing and that suddenly the department needs to look at heritage throughout the Island as opposed to just Jersey Heritage singularly.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Could I ask, you said there was no real relationship before, do you think it almost needed this crisis to get different sides talking and working together in the best interests of the culture and heritage? How did that come about? For something so crucial to our heritage for want of a better word, how could that situation exist?
[15:15]
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
I think in the past Education, Sport and Culture has largely focused on those organisations which it funds as opposed to the voluntary sector or independent charitable organisations, and I think that is why a relationship had not existed up to that time. One would have hoped that the department entitled Education, Sport and Culture would have looked beyond those immediate grant-funded bodies but it would appear that for whatever reason they decided not to.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Very diplomatic. Jeremy, do you have any ...?
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Can you just expand; you mentioned that with the new Minister the relationship seems to have changed. In what way has it changed?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Well, the Minister is interested in the views of the National Trust and the work of the National Trust and also he is keen to get greater working co-operation between the various heritage organisations, so he has been seeking to facilitate that over the last 6 to 9 months.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
One of the conclusions of their review was to develop the single voice to government. What are your feelings on that for the heritage sector?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
I think there are advantages to be had in terms of greater collaboration for the Island's heritage as a whole. It is sometimes difficult to see what the exact benefits would be to an organisation such as the National Trust or the Société, who are independently funded, from greater collaboration, especially given that we have to market our identity rather strongly in order to secure support, whether that be from membership or legacies which, in essence, is essential for our future resourcing and sustainability. So there is danger that if you begin to water down your identity then you may well undermine your future support, and it is that balance that is the difficult thing to strike. No one wants to be seen to be not working with organisations which really are striving for the same objective, but you do have one organisation which benefits from over £2 million worth of public funding per year and you have 2 other organisations, one of which receives about £40,000 and one which receives nothing, and so it is very easy to say: "Look, we shall all come to the table and work together" but you also have to acknowledge the financial differences between those organisations if you are hoping to achieve a good result.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Do you think it is almost a lottery of whether you get support from a willing government, whether it is fiscal support or actual funding? I mean do you think that the heritage is valued nearly enough as it should be?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey: Do you want to answer that one?
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Talk about your membership and how it was going, when it started. National Trust began in ...
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey: 1936.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Yes, which was long before the Heritage Trust was formed in 1982 or 1983, something like that.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
I think Government does value heritage. I think the recent vote in the States Chamber was a good sign of government support for heritage. I think where it falls down sometimes is that it is this focus on the organisation which receives government funding as opposed to looking at all the other organisations, not just the National Trust, not just the Société, the Channel Islands Occupation Society and all those small organisations which are involved in our culture. I think it is difficult sometimes for Government to get to grips with that, whereas it is much easier just to say, well, this is the one we fund, this is the one we have got to deal with and this is the one we have got to control and make sure we get value for our money. But they have really got to look at heritage and culture in a wider remit really.
Member, National Trust for Jersey: Can I come in?
Deputy T.M. Pitman: Please.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
What I would like to say is I see a tendency, it is new and I have only just really focused on it, of trying to make disparate organisations into one and I think the value, culturally speaking, is in the diversity of different sorts, different kinds of organisations whether you are talking arts or heritage or even environment. Now there is a balance because obviously if you have too many they are all pulling in different directions, but I see no difficulty in having the independent organisations and the funded one working together as long as the differences between them are understood particularly when it comes to funding. There is so much emphasis on funding whereas the value of the organisations is often something that cannot be measured in monetary terms.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
It is probably fair to say that is a problem in Jersey generally.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
It may be so. It may be so but it is something that should be said now.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
You talked about your relationship with the department. I wonder if you could enlighten us about your relationship with other heritage groups and how that has evolved and developed.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Well, we have always had a working relationship with both Jersey Heritage and Société and we do not really feel there has ever been a point where we have not got on with either of those organisations. I think there is a lot of talk about organisations not getting on but we do not think that is the case. Obviously in terms of Jersey Heritage's recent call or need for additional finance we supported them in that objective and we have worked closely with both organisations for a long time and so I do not think there is this falling out or lack of co-operation that seems to be perceived and I just do not see it there. I obviously cannot speak for the Société but in terms of the National Trust with both those partners, I think we have a strong relationship.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Just coming into that, because I came through times over the 1980s and 1990s where there was a lot of in-fighting going on between different cultural organisations and I do think that time has gone. I really do think it has gone. I have watched it and I have been very involved with some of them and I think the general overall working together is happening and respect for each other's organisations is there.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
I think, also, the National Trust has almost really ploughed its own furrow in that we do a certain element of work in the Island that we simply get on with and we do not really have time in some respects to be faffing around worrying whether we are getting on with this one or the other. We just need to get on with what we are doing, and that is an extensive programme of land management, which in many ways is not adequately resourced enough but we cope, and also we are acting, really, as an organisation of last resort for those buildings which are either at risk off faced with demolition, Tesson Mill and New Street. So that is our focus and in many ways I find it difficult when we get pulled in to be involved with government policy and consultation, et cetera, a growing amount of that in that isis we have not reallythe resources to play a big enough role in that in some respects and we have to be careful that we carry on focusing on the sort of practical work that we are doing.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
It is possible, if I might please just put in, there that you may not know how small the organisation is and how tightly budgeted it is and Charles might like to tell you how many staff he has and how many volunteers. It might be of interest.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Yes, I think a lot of people think we are bigger than we are. In essence, we have 13 staff and 5 of those work on lands. We have a lands manager and 4 rangers and then we have a small team of 4 craftsmen working on the property side and then in the office we have 2 full-time and 2 part-time.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Has that slightly increased? I went on your website and it said a dozen staff but I suppose that ...
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Yes, our website is out of date, unfortunately. That shows because we have put in lots of money and we do not have a new website.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Your last report was 2002, I think it was.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Yes, we now have one part-time lady who helps with major events and also a bit of fund raising.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
We will obviously come on to funding key issues in a minute with Jeremy; can I just take you back to the one thing you mentioned because I obviously used to work for Education, Sport and Culture and I remember when that change took place and it seemed to me that Education, Sport and Culture was a bad omen in itself. Do you think from the heritage side, culture would benefit from a Minister, dedicated to such, in an ideal world? Are you sort of lost? You are tagged on the end, you know, Education, Sport and Culture. Do you perhaps feel that way? I think a lot of people we have spoken to do feel that it is sort of almost an afterthought, which is very sad.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
That may well be the case but I suppose in some respects it is difficult for me to make that judgment because we did not have any relationship with E.S.C. up until the last 12 months.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Any step forward is a positive.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Yes, is a positive thing. I do not know whether you may have a view on that.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
I think it depends on the Minister. I am afraid from what I have seen over the last 30 years, it depends on who is in charge, who is the Minister and it does depend on personalities. It maybe ought not to but
it does.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey: It is a lottery, in effect, as well.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Yes, on the other hand, I cannot see at the moment any reason for changing what is at the present seems to be a very good situation in terms of general cultural stuff.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
I can say that is definitely a theme coming from all the organisations about the personality that is now within the ministerial posts within E.S.C. that has brought a change in attitude to the whole cultural and heritage sector.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Well, if I might go a little bit further and say that I think since the formation of the Cultural Strategy, about which I do not think highly, it has been 5 years nearly of neglect in the cultural field whereas as soon as we have this new Minister who is interested and involved and wants to learn and wants to do it, everything changes. Everything has changed and I think it would be very foolish to alter that situation in the short term, anyway.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
In summation, then, the former Minister was a philistine.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
I did not say that. [Laughter] He was very ... no, I am going pick you up on that because he was very interested in sport and, in my view, sport is part of culture, not a separate entity. Administratively, yes, it has to be divided out, same as arts and heritage have to be divided out and environment, whatever you
like to say. But they are all how we live, how we see ourselves which is my definition of culture.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Spoken as a true diplomat, there.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Not really intended to be diplomatic. It was just straight from the heart.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
So just looking at our next questions, what do you feel are the current key issues facing the Trust?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
The current key issue facing the Trust is that, unfortunately, we are in a position where we have enough money to pay for our staff and for our day-to-day administration, but we do not have enough funds for our capital programme of refurbishments. So we are currently running at a deficit and that deficit has varied over the last ... well, 2007 it was just under £70,000. In 2008, it was just under £600,000. In 2009, it was just under £280,000. So obviously we need to try and find a way that we can increase our income in order to meet those deficits otherwise that will endanger our long-term sustainability. Obviously, we are asset-rich and those assets are lands or properties that we cannot sell. So in many ways they have no value from a normal economic point of view. What they do have is they have a liability in terms of maintenance and management. That is not to say that necessarily we want things to be different but it is an uphill struggle for us and it has always been challenging. One of the funny things is that a lot of people turn around and say: "Well, how are you coping in these dismal times?" I say: "Well, not really any different to how we have been coping, obviously, since 1936." It is always difficult. Charities, in my personal view are not meant to be rich. They are meant to be working and doing what their objectives set out to do even in tough times.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
We have talked before about the scramble for membership and how the different heritage organisations perhaps struggle with the same clientele. I do not know if you would like to comment?
[15:30]
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
It is difficult. In some ways, Jersey Heritage and the Société offer one set of benefits and we offer another. So the competition is not enormous in that respect. However, it could become increasingly difficult if Jersey Heritage, for example, were to have a major legacy campaign because that could undermine our future. I think what we have always said is that we do not mind operating on a level playing field, but Jersey Heritage has an enormous marketing budget which it could use to promote those different elements and that could be to our detriment. Our marketing budget is nil. So this is where I think Government has to be careful in that in terms of the heritage organisation it is funding, that it ensures that organisation does not undermine the voluntary charitable sector because otherwise Government will end up with the liability that the voluntary sector is currently doing and looking after on its behalf. So if the National Trust was not able to afford to keep going, then undoubtedly that liability would be passed on to the States. So it is in the interest of the States to ensure the National Trust is viable, is supported, not necessarily financially, and is helped to grow and flourish and I think that is where the Government should be seeking to help us because if they do that, then we will look after lots of land and lots of properties which otherwise they would end up with.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
To enlarge on that, in an ideal world with an ideal government, which I am sure you will agree we have got, not. What would you like to see to ensure what you are just talking about so that your future is protected and you can go forward in a way you wish on a level playing field. Because, as you said, it is not just about money.
It is not just about money. Some of the funds that are currently available, whether they be for the Countryside Renewal Scheme or whether they be for the Tourism Development Fund or Listed Buildings Repair Grants, it is incredibly difficult to access those funds. We find it really tough. We have applied to all of those, and not with a great deal of success, and it could be that we are filling in our application forms incorrectly, or it could be that we are seen as not part ofthe sort of government body and people do not recognise the absolute Island benefit of supporting the organisation. Perhaps we have failed in that respect, but we do try and hammer on quite a lot about what we do, that we are a benefit. If I give you an example, 16 New Street, we have spent to date £1 million on renovating that property. We were encouraged by Planning to take on that property and we need about another £250,000 to spend on it. It was a building at risk. It is probably the best early Georgian townhouse left remaining in St. Helier and we are not eligible for a grant from the Listed Building Repair Grant. The maximum there areare £10,000. We were told there would be no funding available for that. We had to struggle to get the planning fees waived and you just think, well, you know, if you want us to take on these buildings then you have to support us. We are not asking for major grants but we would like a feeling that we were being encouraged and supported wherever departments were able to do so, subject to budgetary constraint.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
If I could just move on to another section focusing on the Cultural Strategy, the Council for Culture, do you sit on that? I believe you do?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey: We do not.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
You do not? Okay, and do you have any involvement with Council for Culture, then?
We do not.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Because that is what I was going to ask, if I was allowed to speak, is what I was going to ask, but I have sheet of paper if you want it. I had a lot of problem with the 2005 Cultural Strategy. I met all the consultants who came in over a period of time to write first for F. and E. (Finance and Economics) and then for E.S.C. and I had long conversations with all of them over a period of time. I did not think the Cultural 2005 was a good document because it was long on scope and aspiration and very short on detail. Many of its aspirations have not over the past 5 years come to pass and I use this Cultural Council as an example. Section 6 of the document says that it will be established for council and the purpose of the council will be to support cultural development - this is a summary - attract increased investment and work towards a wider participation of cultural activities, promote culture in the wide community. My submission is that it has not done that and that the Island does not know that the council exists. I know it exists because I have asked questions, but it is not widely known. Its membership is unknown. Its activities are unknown. Its responsibilities are unknown to the wider public and I mean immediately wider, not just a vague thing. There are people all over that do not know it exists. Now, I think it does a good job up to a point because I have asked questions and found out, and they may do excellent work, but I do not think you can promote culture in the wider community in a vacuum of silence. I really do not think you can do that. It cannot be done. The council has not attached increased investment and, obviously, in this climate it is going to be very hard to do that, but it is an aspiration written into the document. One of the reasons why I do not like the document is because it cannot be delivered. The council, it says, will be comprised of an executive group, and members appointed according to Nolan principles and a wider council membership representing major cultural interests in the Island. Now, I do not know but I think there are only 6 members of the council and certainly not the National Trust and I would ask the question: "Why not?" I do not think thinganything was appointed according to Nolan principles. I have seen no advertisements for any of the roles and there certainly does not exist a wider membership. We have had 2 annual conferences and they have been most interesting and very worthwhile but there is never enough time for questions. So it is this
matter of consultation on things I think is very deficient, and I think it is something that would be interesting to go further. Now, I think the Minister does know this and he is prepared to work on it but he is obviously focused straight away on the financial problems of Heritage, and so he needs time to develop all these more and I am very happy to give it to him. Since we are here, that is what I wanted to say.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Thank you very much for that.
Member, National Trust for Jersey: Does that help you?
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
If I can just probe because I believe there is another conference coming up in November. You commented on how you thought it was a worthwhile programme. Can you just expand on those comments?
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
You know that there is a conference coming up. I had to tell Charles, having found out from my own sources, that it was there. People do not know it yet. They will do, I am sure, and I think maybe it is a right time if the word comes up, but it is not out in the public domain yet. See what I mean? It is that part of that difficulty with the P.R. (public relations). What were you going to ask me about it?
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Well, just you commented that it is a worthwhile event. Do you find that it helps, perhaps, in that forum to bring different bodies together?
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Yes, because there has not been this thing that I said, a wider council membership representing major organisations... there has not been that, so this is the only chance of getting different people in under one roof to talk about the things. It is not tremendously efficient but it is quite interesting and it is certainly better than not having anything at all. I do not know what it costs to run.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
We do not know at the moment, but we can find that out.
Member, National Trust for Jersey: That is all right.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
I suppose that almost touches upon what you said about having zero budget to promote yourself compared with organisations you are not in competition with, but do you think that ... again it seems to say that culture is not important. That is what that suggests to me. Obviously, we know it is important but you have not got that facility to promote yourself and I asked the last interviewee, so I thought I would ask you, we have got finance industries which had £809 million profit in a bad year. What support do you get from finance, who apparently pride themselves on their community involvement?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
This year we have done very well. It obviously varies and I think through corporate responsibility, there is some awareness among the finance sector of the need to support local organisations such as the National Trust. HSBC really have been supporting us for the last 10 years in a very active way, and it not just about sponsorship. We do feel that they are like an active partner and they have supported the coastline campaign and also they have recently agreed to sponsor a part-time education officer for the next 2 years for our education activities. Then also the Royal Bank of Canada, we have had a substantial grant of £75,000 from them available over a 3-year period for management and interpretation of our wetland sites, and then most recently the JEC very kindly agreed to purchase a vehicle for us and
your own Parish of St Helier is also supporting the work, the garden, at the front of 16 New Street. So this year has been a real boost. It is not always like that and sometimes it is quite difficult. I think also that we are improving in terms of how we approach corporates and seek sponsorship. So I think that has also helped this year. It is the first time we have brought out a corporate sponsorship booklet. So I think there is support out there but you have to access it in a certain way, and also you have to ensure that the company derives a certain benefit from it, whether that be through marketing or staff engagement, et cetera.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Has there ever been any drive to establish an annual promotional budget that might raise awareness of your activities and all the land that you hold and maintain?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
We are fortunate in the sense that the local media are incredibly supportive of the National Trust and so we market ourselves in that way, really, through press releases, through speaking to the media and doing it in that way, and then we do produce some promotional material for the coastline campaign but again, generally, we do look to try and get sponsorship for that so it does not eat into our working capital. There are bits of money. We are talking about, really, £4,000 or £5,000.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
And it clearly varies year to year.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey: It does, yes.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Can I just ask one question about membership? Just things like how easy do you find it to attract new members, do you attract a certain demographic?
Our data on members is not that good. I am not going to pretend otherwise. However, we have approximately 2,000 members and it seems to stay around that sort of level. We lose a few and we gain a few. I suppose the problem the National Trust faces in some ways is that it does not offer considerable benefit locally in terms of houses or gardens to visit and, you know, we have the Barracks, but that needs investment so we do not charge to go in there. Then we have a small mill, which is open on Saturdays, and that is run by volunteers, and then we are hoping to open New Street. Then, obviously, more recently we did have the benefit of Hamptonne but that has been closed up until now. So obviously, that was a large benefit in terms of our membership,for that to be taken away, and then we do have the ability to offermembers if they go to the U.K. (United Kingdom) they can go and visit all the National Trust properties there for free because we have a reciprocal arrangement with the National Trust of the U.K., and that is now also extending to other countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, et cetera. But that is fine for people who travel but for those who do not travel the benefits are quite limited. So if they are going to join the National Trust they will probably do it for altruistic reasons because they believe in what we are doing.
[15:45]
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Would you make mention of the large numbers of people who turn up to events like the Grantez concerts and we have had huge success because that has gone up year on year and then the coast, the Line in the Sand, is another example.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Yes, the National Trust today has limited membership but it does appear to have much wider support in the Island, and that has been demonstrated through the Line in the Sand where we had 7,000 people turn out. Sunset concerts which are now attracting over 2,000 people. Also our recent Heritage Open Day
we had over 5,000 visit to the properties we opened for one day. So there is a great deal of support there but it is necessary to try and turn that into something tangible, which can help then support our work, and that is probably the sort of challenge we face. We touched on marketing. If you have a limited marketing budget it is quite difficult to promote your membership drive and I think when Jersey Heritage recently set up its membership scheme, it spent quite a considerable amount of money on marketing that scheme and that is where we ended up with an unlevel playing field.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Jeremy is going to come on to the implementation of the Cultural Strategy and how you see that as being addressed but could I ask ... you touched on Hamptonne, which is a joint venture, how do you see that progressing or not in the future because it seems pretty bleak, to be quite honest.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Yes, well Hamptonne was closed with I suppose a degree of discussion with the other 2 bodies but, ultimately, it was a decision made by the board of Jersey Heritage and, in some ways, I think they failed to appreciate the damage that potentially could have for the 2 other organisations because, as I said, we have little to offer our members locally. So to take a large chunk out of that offer did cause us considerable concern and we have been, I suppose, hassling Jersey Heritage and its chairman ever since to see if there are means and ways of trying to get Hamptonne reopened, and wew havebeen pushing for the self-catering to try and get that in place because that would help generate funds to cover the running costs. Also the Trust is looking to acquire some additional land below Hamptonne and we would look perhaps to develop some sort of camping on a very small scale so it was not of detriment to the site, but again in order to generate funds to make the site sustainable. It would appear that Jersey Heritage believes that they can open it in the peak summer months and that the ticket sales will cover the running costs, which is good news, but, b then you wonder why then it was closed this year and why did they not open it during the peak season if it was able to wash its own face during the time, but that was the decision that their Chairman and Board made, their chairman made at the time. But we are working hard with them and the Société is also involved to try and find a way forward and I am mildly
optimistic.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
I was just thinking about how much public money went into the original establishment of Hamptonne.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Well, when it was purchased the States matched pound for pound. So for us toto put in £200,000the States matched that, so it was a kitty of £400,000 which acquired the site and then the Société invested, I think, approximately £1.6M.
Member, National Trust for Jersey: Something like that.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
In the refurbishment of the site and the Jersey Heritage, while it had the management costs thereafter. So a considerable amount of public money has gone into Hamptonne and I think the public, when it was opened 20-odd years ago, recognised the need for a rural life museum because our countryside and our rural life isis such an integral part of our culture, and so it is a great shame really that that recognition has been lost. We recently opened it for Heritage Open Day and everyone was saying: "Why is it not open?" We said: "Well, you need to write to your politicians and express horror and dismay and that way we might get it reopened."
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Do they still do marriages and things there? I know it is somewhere we looked at getting married in.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
They do and I think, you know, it is not just in Jersey but across the board there is a growing need to try and make such sites more sustainable. So you do need to look at diversifying and increasing your income, and Hamptonne has some advantages, but, you know, its café is in the wrong place, its offer is quite limited. So really, theret is no great collection there or display, so in order to attract people there you need the living history, you need the animals to breathe life into the site and all those elements do cost money and, you know ... and the site itself would cost about £35,000 a year just to maintain. It is a big site.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Moving on to the next point. So in your view, how should the implementation of the Cultural Strategy be progressed and are there any areas that should be focused on in the immediate future?
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
I would say it needs to be more realistic in terms of what it can deliver. One of the problems with the writing of this 2005, and was mentioned many times in the debate which I sat through in the House, was the absence of any financial costings. Now, the costings had been done by 2 sets of individuals, they were both consultants from outside but both cultural consultants, one from E.S.C. and one for the Jersey Arts Trust and they did not have quite the same figures, but the end result was that the Cultural Strategy, as it stood, was not affordable and that is why nobody looked at it, really. I think the debate might well have been lost had it not been for a very impassioned speech by Senator Frank Walker that it was good to support culture in principal, and that is a very good argument. So it went through but with no costings, of course. So I do think that to review it with a more reasonable set of aspirations ... there is a couple in there now about putting a cultural website on, which is a very good one, but to have crèches in all the cultural sites is probably not a realistic one. So that is what I mean about rationalising it and having some figures attached to it. The second thing is, I do think it should have a very wide consultation, that I have mentioned already.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey: Just to say, it has huge aspirations.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
7.1 is the thing that ...
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
And it talks a lot about supporting the voluntary sector and helping the voluntary sector to grow and flourish, but it does not really say how that can be achieved, what is needed and when it should be achieved by. So it is a very aspirational document without any real teeth or bone to it, really.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Some people might say that we are very good at supporting things in principle but not so good about putting our money where our principles are, really.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Well, you have put your money where the Heritage Trust is concerned and I am very delighted about that. So it is beginning to come.
Deputy T.M. Pitman: Yes, it is very optimistic.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
It needs some further work on that funding but yes, I am optimistic. I think it is great.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
But I do think there has to be a greater recognition of the other bodies and if you want them to come to the table there may well be goodwill on their part, but you need a bit more than goodwill and they need a bit of encouragement, and when this cultural strategy was launched by Deputy Labey , I rather boldly stood up and said: "Well, what is in it for us?" She was not really able to give me an answer and I have to say when I look at Steven Harris on's report, although I supported very strongly the idea of the groups working togetherbut, again, what keeps hauntinging me is what is in it for the National Trust, and ifi the Minister or if the States want the heritage groups to work closely together then they have to ensure that the benefits are equally shared and support is equally given, because otherwise there is no incentive for us to be at the table. We have done what we have done quite successfully since 1936. It has been a struggle. It is a struggle at the moment but, potentially, it will carry on, hopefully with public support, but we recognise that for the Island as a whole to work closely together, if we are going to do that, then we need to be sure that our position is safeguarded and we are being encouraged to grow and flourish as a charitable organisation.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Obviously, you have said things have improved since we have had a new Minister; why do you think that recognition of that need for equality has not been there? Is it because you do not have so much to show, perhaps?
Member, National Trust for Jersey: Just time, I think.
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
I think it is time and I think because Jersey Heritage was so-called in crisis then the whole focus has been on addressing that crisis in the immediate future, and that is where the States have to be a little bit careful in the sense that it voted to give Jersey Heritage a certain amount of money, or the Council of Minister proposed a certain amount of money, but then it said: "Well, Jersey Heritage has to go out and raise £300,000." No one, it seems to me, at that time considered whether that actual fund-raising could have an impact on the other heritage organisations. So it was very much single focused again on the one group without looking at making those judgments by looking at itit as a whole.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
I suppose in my former career, and it is something I found over the years as money became tighter, you
were going out and you are competing for the same support from different organisations. So I suppose that is even more focused for the cultural organisation. You are all competing for limited amounts of money, is that fair to say? And with Heritage apparently in crisis I suppose they are going to benefit?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
There is only a certain pot of money in the Island which will support the work that is undertaken by Heritage without a doubt, and that is also the case for legacies and it will also be the case for sponsorship. I suppose we will have to distinguish ourselves in order to ensure we can have a certain amount of that cake but it will be difficult because, as we have touched on quite a lot, it is having the marketing ability and the resources to prepare funding applications, et cetera. It takes a lot of time and effort, and if you are a small organisation, it is quite difficult.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
We spoke at one time within the organisation of suggesting that there would be one education officer who would be briefed about the 3 different organisations and who would then promote them, making clear the differences between the organisations and what they could deliver and what their purpose is and so on and so forth. At the time I still thought that was a very good idea and it has not gone forward, and I do not know whether anybody has gone against it, probably because you have to be sure that the education officer does treat things equally, you know, that sort of thing. Maybe the same could be done for marketing, but it is all pie in the sky at the moment.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Yes, I am conscious of time and I do not want to keep you too much longer but I do have a few questions. We have come up against this distinction of there is culture as art and there is culture as heritage, do you feel that a strategy which was more tailored for each would be better or do you find that marrying them together was a correct way forward?
[16:00]
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
I think there is an advantage in having a Heritage Strategy and an Art Strategy, if you want to call them those. Definitely, I think Steven Harris on, by him focusingon the heritage organisations solely, I think it is easier to deal with, but that is a personal view, and I suppose that is also related to the fact, you know, what is easier in terms of my life in terms of being involved in that process. I think if it gets too wide it can become unwieldy and I think they are quite distinct. Although there is a lot of overlap there is also quite distinct differences between the 2 sectors. So I think by separating them out you may well progress things in a quicker manner and in a more distinct recognisable manner.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
But if you look at the mainland and the D.C.M.S. (Department of Culture, Media and Sports) ... arts and culture, media and sports, slightly different ... their Cultural Strategy covers everything and then it is divided out inside it, and I think that is probably a healthier way because you do not get one section developed, and I would put environmental things in as well as the arts and heritage. I would put that in as well. It is definitely a cultural issue.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Do you have another questions?
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
No, I do not. That pretty much covered it.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Really, with the time is there anything that you particularly want to talk about that we missed?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey: I have brought you some accounts.
Deputy T.M. Pitman: Not on your website yet?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey:
Not on the website but I have brought them, physical copies of those, and I have also brought a handbook just to give you a bit more flavour of what we look after and if you want to see anything that we do, including New Street, then obviously you are very welcome.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
I think we will take you up on that, definitely.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
Deputy Le Hérissier said you did not want to go over all past history and I said to him: "A man who does not look past does not know where he is and where he is going and does not learn from his mistakes." So that is me. I have a really good grasp of what has been happening over the last 30 years.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
I think that sums it up. Deputy Le Hérissier is, finally, a man who does not know where he is going. [Laughter] Or where he has been. [Laughter]
Member, National Trust for Jersey: No, I understand.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Or where he is. [Laughter]
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
You did not want to go into who said what, when and how did this happen. I understand that. It is not the time to raise the difficulties.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Good. I thank you both very much for coming and I am sure we definitely will take you up on the offer. Certainly, I would love to see New Street.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:
It is lovely. It is really great. It is really exciting.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
It seems to have been going on since it was built. [Laughter] Not that I remember it.
Member, National Trust for Jersey:[1] 1700 or 60s?
Chief Executive Officer, National Trust for Jersey: 1730s. It was a small team. [Laughter]
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
By now very elderly, I should imagine.
Deputy J.M. Maçon: Thank you very much.
[1]
Ms S Lissenden wished to make the following additional comment: I should like to record that it would have been helpful to have been made aware of the report on the cultural strategy published in
June 2010 by Mr McLoughlin. I am uncertain who should have drawn our attention to this but it fully illustrates the lack of transparency and openness within the government's cultural strategy, about which I was complaining.