Arts Council (Hansard, 26 November 1993)

§ Mr. Brooke

In my statement of 21 July,Official Report, columns 355–66, I set out a clearer framework for the Government's relationship with the Arts Council of England. As part of this, I asked the council to consider ways in which its accountability could be improved, and to review the scope for savings in its administrative costs. I am now in a position to announce my conclusions on this further work.

210W

As I made clear in my earlier statement, the Government remain committed to the "arm's-length principle" for arts funding. This leaves the council to steer the general direction of artistic policy and to decide the allocation of resources. But with that degree of independence for the council in the use of taxpayers' money comes also the responsibility for explaining their decisions clearly and fully. Accordingly, I have explored with the chairman ways in which the council's accountability can be improved. Among the council's proposals are twice-yearly public seminars outside London; occasional or regular presentations to the National Heritage Select Committee, should the Committee agree; an annual Arts Council lecture by the chairman or a council member; annual policy seminars covering the different art forms, led by art form panel chairman and attended by the relevant art form constituency and specialist press; meetings with representative associations; and, subject to the agreement of the arts organisations concerned, publication of summaries of council appraisal reports. I welcome these proposals, and have asked the chairman to follow them up.

I have also explored with the chairman the scope for making savings in the council's administrative costs. At my request, the council has undertaken a full analysis of its activities in relation to the core functions identified in my earlier statement, including the opportunities for market testing, and assessed the scope for administrative reductions. In the light of this analysis, I am persuaded that there is scope for making savings in the council's administrative costs without damage to its core functions and while meeting the costs associated with increased accountability. I have therefore asked the council now to implement a reduction of 8 per cent. in its current gross administrative costs, equivalent to a saving approaching £600,000 in a full year. It will be for the council itself to determine the precise areas where these savings are to be achieved and to identify them in its business plan for next year.

In addition, the council is due shortly to complete its own review of staffing and structure in the regional arts boards, and some further administrative streamlining may be possible as a result. The council will also hold further discussions with the regional arts boards about delegation of projects and schemes activity, and aim to reach conclusions by the end of the current financial year.

The statement marks the end of the long series of reviews by the Government into the structures and staffing of the arts funding system. The effect has been to establish appropriate levels for decision making, to clarify accountability and to reduce bureaucracy. It is now for the council to settle the detailed framework within which those working in the arts community can operate. My Department will continue, as a regular part of discussions in the corporate and business planning context, to keep the administrative costs associated with the funding system under close scrutiny. Our aim will be to ensure that overheads are kept to a minimum and that as much as possible of the available resources is channelled directly to arts practitioners and to the artistic activity which must be the focus of all our endeavours.