Arts Council 0 I' GREi\7' BRI'T'AI N Progress and Renewal Thirty-fifth annua l report an[l acc(nint s 19 79/80 Thirty-fifth Annual Report and Accounts 198 0 ISSN 0066-813 3 Published by the Arts Council of Great Britai n 105 Piccadilly, London W IV OA U Designed by Duncan Firt h Printed by Watmoughs Limited, Idle, Bradford ; and Londo n Cover picture : Indian dancer, Tara Rajkumar, taking par t in a lecture-demonstration at the Brentford Girls ' School, Hounslow. Photo : Chris Davies . Contents 4 Chairman's Introductio n 5 Secretary-General's Report 9 Regional Developmen t 13 Drama 23 Music 26 Visual A. 29 Dance 31 Literature 32 Housing the Arts 33 Training 35 Education 35 Personnel and Administration 36 Scotland 40 Wales 44 Membership of Council and Staff 45 Council, Committees and Panels 51 Annual Accounts , Funds and Exhibitions The objects for which the Arts Council of Great Britai n is established are : 1 To develop and improve the knowledge , understanding and practice of the arts ; 2 To increase the accessibility of the arts to the publi c throughout Great Britain ; and 3 To co-operate with government departments, local authorities and other bodies to achieve these objects . Chairman's Introduction The year under review herein is somethin g of a watershed in the Council's affairs. The reorganisation, described in more detail b y the Secretary-General, represents a n overdue exercise in streamlining and i n gearing the Arts Council to meet th e challenge of the 'SOs. I should like to express my personal gratitude to Lord Hutchinson and his Working Party for the time and effort they devoted to analysing the Council's problems and for their constructiv e recommendations which the Council has been able to consider in depth and for the most part to adopt . The changes, now largely implemented, should enable our panels an d committees to concentrate more on issues of policy and less on detaile d considerations of finance . These will become, in practice as they have always been in theory, the responsibility of senior officers answerable to and working within the policies of the Council . Actual decisions, financial and other, remain of course the responsibility of the Counci l itself advised by its panels and senior officials . The changes will place some added responsibility on the shoulders o f directors and senior staff without, 1 would hope, increasing thei r workload. The directors, who are far from being'faceless bureaucrats ' and anything but dictatorial in their dealings, constitute the Council's main link with the practitioners of the arts and enjoy, I believe, thei r confidence and trust . Each not only possesses great knowledge and experience of a particular art form, be it music, drama, literature, danc e or the visual arts, but must also carry the administrative responsibilitie s that fall to the head of a department . This dual role is not easy to sustain but the Council team under the direction of th e Secretary-General and his Deputy, with the help of the Financ e Director manage to sustain it with distinction . On behalf of the Counci l I should like to acknowledge the high quality and dedication of ou r officers. At the end of 1979 Lord Hutchinson retired from th e Vice-Chairmanship of the Council to become Chairman of the Trustee s of the Tate Gallery and is succeeded by Dr Richard Hoggart . No Chairman could have been better supported by his Vice-Chairman tha n I have been by Lord Hutchinson and I am most grateful for hi s unstinting help, his wise counsel and his friendship in the last three years. He will be greatly missed and we all wish him every success a t the Tate Gallery . Secretary-General's Report Progress and Renewa l The year under review `The experience of recent years shows that w e saw the initiation of cannot continue to run the arts on a shoe-strin g marked changes i n much longer, or the shoe-string will snap' . However, government policy despite the Minister's eloquent advocacy on behal f affecting the finance of of the arts, that shoe-string was stretched even the arts, and in the tighter in the year under review. The final judgemen t internal procedures of on this year's arts finance cannot be better expresse d the Arts Council itself. than in the words of the Conservative Paper: 'There is hardly a single area of public spending where eac h Government and Finance extra million pounds can make a greater impact - The coming of a new government almost coincide d nor one where each cut of a million, a thousand o r with the beginning of the financial year . The arts even a hundred pounds can have a more disastrou s world had taken encouragement from a effect.' Conservative Discussion Paper published in Augus t 1978, and edited by Mr Norman St John-Stevas . A point which is often overlooked is that the art s This paper was not an official Party pronouncemen t (unlike say, health or education) actually ear n it represented the views of Mr St John-Stevas an d money for the country, especially from the touris t ten other prominent Conservatives. As everyon e trade. Hence the paper rightly emphasises that : `The expected, he became the Minister for the Arts, an d arts can genuinely be said to pay their way' . his appointment was warmly welcomed by the art s world, since he had already shown knowledgeabl e Public Subsid y and sympathetic concern for the arts . Public subsidy for most arts was not practised o n any scale until the Second World War, when th e However, the new government fairly soon cu t Council for the Encouragement of Music and the £I .1 million from the grant already voted to the Art s Arts was established . At the end of the war all Council by the outgoing Labour Government . The parties judged CEMA's value to the community to arts world was shocked, and no less shocked by th e have been so great that it should be established on a increase of VAT. Pre-election assurances, by both M r permanent basis as the Arts Council of Grea t St John-Stevas and the Prime Minister, that th e Britain. Government would not cut arts money, have naturally been widely recalled, but the Government Public subsidy for the arts has subsequently been has replied that the situation it inherited was worse one of the few bi-partisan policies in British than it expected, and that the arts must take a government, the Opposition normally disagreein g (comparatively small) cut along with other sectors of with the Government onlv to the extent o f public expenditure . The arts community has t o suggesting that their Grant-in-Aid to the Art s accept that the Government was elected with a Council was not large enough . Hence, the mandate to cut public expenditure, but there ar e Conservative Paper affirms that : 'There is no doubt arguments in the Conservative Discussion Paper a s that public patronage and support for the arts is here to why the arts might have been spared from 'cuts to stay and the Conservative Party will continue t o across the board' and, many would hope, migh t back it . .'. Though there is much evidence that th e indeed have been treated more generously tha n Minister for the Arts has fought hard for his budget , before. it seems likely to be some time before there can b e any real growth in the arts . The arts did not present an area where there had been lavish expenditure by the previous Arguments against Subsid y Government. Indeed, the Conservative Discussio n Although the need for public subsidy has bee n Paper had emphasised that under Labour, generally accepted, there have always been a fe w expenditure by arts bodies, large and small, had bee n doubters, and it may be worth considering the tw o 'pared to the bone' . Hence the paper affirms that main doubts. The first is that the arts are a luxury 5 Secretary-General 's Report which should not be subsidised while necessities are consumer has not been expected to pay th e still underprovided . Sir Robert Peel used this economic price for education, health services, o r argument when opposing in 1845 the move to even for public swimming pools, amateur cricket establish free municipal museums, on the ground s facilities, public golf-courses or public parks. All that local taxation was urgently needed to `improve these services were exempted from the full impact o f the salubrity of the dwellings of the population '. market forces because they were deemed essential to Critics would still put the need for better housin g the quality of fife in a civilised community - a point above the needs of the arts . to which I shall return . Third, the operation of the `ballot box of the market place ' is highly This was, and is, a plausible objection, but there ar e undemocratic, since some voters have many mor e answers, though they are too rarely rehearsed . I votes (i.e. more money) than others. Most children, shall try to indicate some now. If arts subsidies were for whom the arts are vital, scarcely have a vote at abolished, there is no guarantee that the money all. Fourth, subsidy is the only way to bring into saved would be used on the precise alternative an y being arts which may begin by pleasing the few, bu t particular objector may have in mind.