For much of the time the discussion of national and international politics in the media remains something taking place at a distance. These are the “noises off” of stage direction. Alternatively, they can be experienced as a variety of spectator sport …. fascinating and even exciting to watch, but safely located the other side of the TV screen. There are occasions, however, when these distant developments touch the ground on which we stand, perhaps even with the force of a lightning strike. This is possibly the best way in which to describe the politics of “austerity”, characteristic of British political life for some time now.
Certainly throughout the premiership of David Cameron, although rooted in the Tony Blair period, there has been an insistence on the part of central government that as a nation we have been living beyond our means, that public borrowing has been at too high a level. This perception has been linked to a rooted reluctance to cover the deficit by increased taxation, and an equally vigorous opposition to tackle any radical rationalisation of the demands of the state, so that the only solution to this perceived configuration of problems has been increased austerity.
This argument has been employed, as much as in any other area, to support the steady reduction in central government support for local authorities. We have now reached the point at which municipal government plays a smaller role in political life in Britain than in any other developed economy. Regions have no legal ability to raise funds to support their responsibilities and activities, and localities are severely constrained in their capacity to do so. The not-surprising result has been a steady reduction in local services in almost every respect. The community in which I live is now planning to run its public library services with the help of volunteers, as the city is unable to pay professionals to do so, to mention just one illustration of this general process.
The point at which these developments touch me most directly is in the funding for the arts. The South Square Centre (of which regular readers of this blog will have heard a great deal) is now facing a very direct threat to its continued existence. The small enterprises, galleries and community services to which the Centre is a home are at the moment compelled to rethink their way of working and financing themselves. The local authority, which is the proprietor of the configuration of buildings which we use, is under enormous financial pressure, and has decided that the subsidised rents which it has been charging to a wide range of charitable and voluntary organisations can no longer be sustained. The target they are pursuing is that council-owned property let under these terms will, in future, aim to return commercial-level rents. A fund will be available to with these organisations will be able to apply for continuing subsidy, but this will be on a competitive basis, and in all cases the level of subsidy will be much lower than it has been in the past.
As a consequence, South Square swill be required to reconfigure its activities, placing them on a more commercial basis, find alternative sources of funding, or go out of business. It will be possible for us to apply for subsidy under the new scheme, but even if successful that application will leave us in the situation of raising a larger amount of money in order to meet the demand for higher rents. This is perhaps an acceptable situation in relation to the two commercial ventures which occupy spaces in the Centre. There is no possibility of finding higher rents from the two charitable bodies who are tenants. There is a marginal, and strictly limited, possibility of raising greater rental income from the artists who rent studios in the complex. The gallery spaces would appear to be faced with the necessity of closing, and turning them over to use as commercially viable ventures of one kind or another, because it is unlikely that these activities would qualify for the new subsidies at a level adequate to enable them to continue functioning.
The situation is still not entirely clear, and will not be so until the middle of February at least, but any realistically considered future does appear dire. Bradford will be the poorer for it, because the Centre is the only arts centre in the city outside the municipal galleries, which do not offer exhibition opportunities to local artists, except in a very marginal manner. They see their role as bringing into the city examples of work which has an established reputation on a national level.
Let’s finish on a lighter note. I was amused, reading Kenneth Clark’s Landscape into Art, to encounter the following sentence in relation to Giorgione’s Tempesta. “The Tempesta is one of those works of art before which the scholar had best remain silent.” He then devotes the best part of two pages to discussion of it! Ah well! That’s a critic for you!.