>

ON November 4, the Arts Council England announced which arts entities are welcomed to apply to the National Portfolio Organisations (NPO) programme.

For those unfamiliar with arts funding in Britain, or the significance of the NPO programme – the Arts Council England, Arts Council Wales and Creative Scotland have a support structure which grants “deserving” organisations sustained funding for a period of time longer than other funding streams.

For arts organisations of all disciplines this means those which are awarded NPO support have regular funding for a longer period, which means their ability to plan, strategise, and grow is greater as they don’t have to apply for funding every six months or year for their next project.

Such a funding guarantee allows an organisation to better settle itself into the local environment and focus on the delivery of art rather than address constant fundraising concerns.

Every new NPO list comes with a lot of controversy as many fail to get this lifeline support. This year, however, is particularly unpalatable for numerous reasons.

First, the vicious cuts to the arts as a whole, which forced organisations to be dropped or receive reduced funding. Second, the decision has been heavily impacted by the pandemic which means that after over two years of uncertainty many organisations now see another three to five years of uncertainty looking ahead.

Notable losers include Glynebourne with a cut of 51.8 per cent and Welsh National Opera, cut by 35.9 per cent. The London Philharmonic Orchestra suffered a cut of 12 per cent, while the Britten Sinfonia, Cafe Oto and the English National Opera have seen their funding cut entirely.

The cuts were sadly unsurprising, considering this government’s vicious attacks across all aspects of life. However the nature of certain cuts will have a far more damaging effect than merely reducing the spending power of arts organisations.

First, most of these organisations get support grants from other sources, but that does not mean the reduction, or cancelling, in NPO funds is less of an issue.

The reality is that often the NPO funds are designated for specific local work – which in the case of Glynebourne Opera means their touring and education department will take the brunt, with the consequence that the company is less able to reach out to those who are unable to trek to their productions.

One of the greatest bastions of art in our country is forcibly denied access to a vast number of people of this country.

Similarly at Britten Sinfonia — one of the highest quality classical music outlets in Suffolk, a region already denied access to most art — cuts could put its ability to stay in the region at risk. Hence a region that should be seeing greater investment locally is effectively punished.

More harrowingly still is the denial of funding to English National Opera, with the suggestion of a move to Manchester as part of a “levelling up” strategy... while forgetting that Opera North exists to cater to Manchester. So, as can be seen “sense” isn’t necessarily ruling judgement across these decisions.

For organisations which have faced significant cuts, choices are limited – and sadly most solutions mean working-class audiences lose out.

Applying for funding from project to project would mean they can carry on doing projects they want to do, but ultimately it means they have to spend more time fundraising than doing almost anything else, or risk completely folding should such funds not be secured.

They could find sponsorship and support from wealthy donors but this would effectively mean an organisation is left completely at the behest of the donor. This can be seen in the US where it often translates into arts organisations having to think solely as businesses and not as artistic organisations, resulting in lesser art for “mass appeal.”

Also, presenting anything genuinely radical could just be turned down by a donor who opposes said idea.

The third choice is simply to fold. This sadly will be a common outcome as the challenges of juggling all the strain of living from pay packet to pay packet means most arts organisations simply will not survive.

With the number of arts organisations in Britain dropping, the ability to cater to the vast majority of British people will disappear, except for the wealthy few who can enjoy art solely as a thing of leisure.

Many readers of the Morning Star will not be surprised when I say the Tories enjoy denying the common populace their dignity. But the nature of this attack on arts is by no means an accident — it has been constant since 2010, and while we have this mob of Etonians deciding what we, the proles and plebs, are granted, they will continue to make sure we are only given crumbs.

Similarly, with the current battle with the trade union movement, the government and their anti-worker friends in Royal Mail or the railways are going to look for places to recover the profits they lose if they are defeated by the unions.

And the arts are a likely target, because we can continue to paint the likes of opera as an elitist art form that isn’t for the working class, while simultaneously cutting the very funds which allow it to bridge the gap between art and the masses.

Class consciousness in the country is growing, albeit nervously on some issues. We need to expand our vision of what fighting for the dignity of working-class people in this country should look like.

The age-old motto of “bread and roses” is a poignant counter to the argument that art is frivolous. While having decent wages and conditions in the workplace are vital, if we achieve that but lack the joy of art in our homes and communities, our dignity is solely as that of worker bees.

This government has shown its vision for art, one where art is left to the free market, which is a nice euphemism for say they only want it to be a domain for their wealthy and “cultured” friends.

Our vision is to say that art is valuable to us as it is our bread and roses. Our lives need dignity, security, safety, community, and beauty and the way to achieve that is understanding we need both our trade unions and our artists to flourish.

We need to be out on the picket line fighting to defend the very people who make our lives richer, and our nation cultured.

As workers, and working-class people, we are being attacked on all fronts. We must not let these ghouls in government win on any front. We cannot let them turn art into a sweet leisurely pastime solely for the wealthy. We need our bread and roses!