THE ARTS: FUTURE GOVERNMENT POLICY (Hansard, 10 February 1977)

§ Baroness LEE of ASHERIDGE
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The MINISTER of STATE, DEPARTMENT of EDUCATION and SCIENCE (Lord Donaldson of Kingsbridge)
Yes, my Lords, the Government are very much aware of the importance of maintaining this country's excellence in the arts, of which they are very proud and to which the noble Baroness has so signally contributed in the past. She will have welcomed the Answer given by my 1275 right honourable friend the Prime Minister on 2nd December that there will be no major changes in the Government's policy towards the arts. So far as Government grants are concerned, my noble friend will not expect me to anticipate the presentation of Estimates to Parliament, and she must await the publication of the Supply Estimates for 1977–78 and the publication in detail of the Government's plans for future expenditure. But in view of the importance which the Government attach to the arts, I can say that I am confident that there will be sufficient resources broadly to maintain the level of Government support in real terms.

§ Baroness LEE of ASHERIDGE
My Lords, in thanking the Minister for his reply, may I ask whether he is aware of the growing anger among those who are responsible for maintaining the levels of excellence in our theatres and orchestras, in London, in the regions, and elsewhere? Increasingly they feel that they are being grossly exploited. I am sure that the Minister is aware that if we add together the grant given to the Arts Council and that for the museums and galleries, they amount to only one-twentieth of the income brought into this country by the tourist trade. In these circumstances, will the Minister come to the rescue of the people of whom we purport to be so proud, by seeing not only that they are maintained, but that they are given more adequate tools to do their job?

§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGE
My Lords, the noble Baroness puts me in a difficult position. What she has said is incontrovertible. A great deal more money could be spent on the arts. But the Prime Minister, who is my leader and the leader of the noble Baroness, made it clear on 2nd December that, although he did not intend to make any major changes, he did not feel he was able at present to increase the allocation of the national dividend given to the arts. I agree with my noble friend that a very strong case for doing so can be made. My noble friend Lord Cudlipp's letter which appeared two days ago in The Times put the matter extremely well; but we are subject to overriding constraints, which we all know and which I will not bore noble Lords by going through again. As a member, however humble, of this 1276 Government, I do not feel that I can quarrel with my leaders so long as at least they maintain and do not decrease Government support for the arts. That is what I have said in my Answer to my noble friend.

§ Baroness LEE of ASHERIDGE
My Lords, would the Minister agree that in a civilised country a high priority ought to be given to the arts on merit alone, without taking in economic factors? Would he also agree that, far from the Government paying for the arts, the arts are helping to pay for the Government, both in terms of industrial design and of the growing number of people who come here on package holidays, part of the attraction being our free museums and galleries as well as our theatres? In those circumstances, will the noble Lord discuss this matter with the Treasury officials to see whether they could make a fairer deal for the arts?

§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGE
My Lords, I have no difficulty whatever in agreeing to my noble friend's proposition. I agree with her arguments, which I have frequently put to my colleagues, and I will do so again. But this is not a question of weakness or strength; it is a question of a national decision. Although both my noble friend and I believe that the amounts involved for the arts would not basically affect the national interest, when they are multiplied by all the other people who are putting up the same kind of arguments—the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone, did so last week, saying that the amount involved was only £4 million and that would not make any difference to the national problems—it is a different matter. My colleagues guarding the nation's standard of living have to pay attention to this. I will happily put the arguments again—and my noble friend must not think that they are new—but that is as far as I can go.

§ Lord POLWARTH
My Lords, would the noble Lord consider asking his colleagues to find a way of exempting all recognised artistic organisations from the 2 per cent. National Insurance surcharge which in the case of the symphony orchestra of which I am chairman—and I declare my interest—is going to add nearly £10,000 a year to our expenses? 1277 We shall find it virtually impossible to recover that in increased charges in the way in which a commercial organisation can.

§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGS-BRIDGE
I will certainly look at this detailed question and discuss it with my colleagues.

§ Lord SEGAL
My Lords, is my noble friend aware of the desperate plight of many provincial theatres, quite a number of which are now faced with closure? Will he give an assurance that, whatever allocation is made by the Government, our provincial theatres will receive their due share, and that the major part of the funds available will not be confined to the London area?

§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGE
My Lords, I can certainly give that assurance. The position of local theatres is an extremely mixed one. Some are meeting trouble; one in particular has just recently been rescued by a fairly large grant from the Arts Council and a still larger one from the local authority. I can quote another instance where the local authority has not come up with the necessary money and there is a problem. Local theatres are not neglected; we are fully aware of the problems that they are facing. The commercial theatre is facing problems, too. At the moment something like two-thirds of the total Arts Council grant is spent outside London.

§ Baroness EMMET of AMBERLEY
My Lords, I am in full sympathy with the plea of the noble Baroness for consideration for the arts. May I ask the Minister to draw the attention of the Government to the success of the Pompeii exhibition, where a high entrance fee is charged? The exhibition has been so successful that the organisers have sought an extension. I wonder whether consideration might be given, where possible, to making admission charges for the arts?

§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGE
My Lords, I appreciate the point made by the noble Baroness. In the national institutions, since the change of Government, it has been policy not to charge for general entrance; but it is not the policy not to charge for localised 1278 special exhibitions within those institutions. So we have already moved some way towards meeting the point made by the noble Baroness.

§ Lord FEVERSHAM
My Lords, since the Minister is being so agreeable in his answers to these questions today, I wonder whether he would also agree that one of the reasons why so many organisations are in difficulty is perhaps, as it has been calculated, because the inflation rate in the arts and in organisations running the arts, is running rather far ahead of inflation in general? Therefore, when the Government are thinking about support for the arts being kept going, will they do so in terms of meeting an above-average inflation rate in that regard?

§ Lord DONALDSON of KINGSBRIDGE
My Lords, when I speak of maintaining the grant in real terms, I mean last year's grant plus a calculation as to next year's inflation and an adjustment to meet it. The Arts Council's estimates—I believe that figures of 20 per cent. and 21 per cent. have been mentioned—applied primarily to a period something over a year ago, when Equity succeeded in raising the salaries of actors by some 80 per cent., and inflation was running at between 25 and 30 per cent. At the moment, about 75 per cent. of arts expenditure is in wages and salaries, and these, presumably, are subject to the normal disciplines under which the country is working. But I think there are a certain number of items in this field which are more expensive. The Government are, unfortunately, confronted with a great variety of things which require money, most of which have different rates of inflation. The policy has always been to estimate a national rate, and to calculate on that.