UK GOSSIPS. Cont'd.
additional strain on resources, especially in a museum that is so technologically reliant. Yet his government grant, like that of all national museums, rises at best only in line with the retail price index - and thus is effectively frozen in real terms. "It's a classic paradox," Dr Sharp says. "We are really pleased that the numbers going through the national museums have jumped so dramatically, but at the same time that increases the need to reinvest." In a report published to coincide with yesterday's launch, Tony Travers of the London School of Economics says that the government has also vastly increased expectations of what museums should provide. They must be repositories of knowledge and scholarship, but they must also "broaden their educational and social outreach" - and provide a spur to economic regeneration and tourism. "I would never advocate higher public spending," he told me. "But it would be easier to defend that argument if there were not increased expectations. The targets that have been set by the government's demands for productivity gains are quite sharp." One of the most interesting sections of his report looks at the finances of the museum sector alongside other groups receiving funding from the Department of Culture, Media and Sport. It compares the actual amount received in 2001-02 with the projected figure for 2005-06. Over that time, sport will receive a 91 per cent increase (from an admittedly relatively low base of £64 million), whereas museums, galleries and libraries are scheduled to receive only a 26 per cent increase on expenditure of £353 million. This obviously says something about the Government's priorities. But, more surprisingly, over the same period, spending on the arts is also projected to rise by 63 per cent (from £253 to £411.5 million). That whopping increase shows just how effective the arts lobby has been at getting additional government money into its coffers. They have moaned vociferously about under-funding - and they have been rewarded for their pains. The museums on the other hand, while just as deserving of love, attention and cash, have been rather British and stiff-upper-lipped about everything. Only now are they realising the value of intensive and united lobbying as a means of pleading their cause. Since the amount they are asking for is relatively small and since their existence undoubtedly adds to the richness of this nation's cultural life, I am instinctively in favour of their plea being successful. But I would add one note of caution. As with theatres, there is absolutely no point in keeping open a museum or gallery that has little to offer. The Arts Council has, in the midst of plenty, taken some tough decisions along these lines. It has concentrated resources and let artistic and commercial success to flower, while failing institutions have been allowed to go to the wall. If the museums want to be similarly rewarded for their excellence, they must be similarly hard-headed. It may be that every museum is performing at the top of its game. But, if they are not, difficult decisions should be taken to ensure that the best and brightest survive.-Sara Crampton.
 |
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
||||