Arts Council / British Coucil / Restructuring
Andy Field makes some interesting arguments for keeping the Arts Council.
There are many worth while companies being hit in this round and I am supporting the Bush amongst others. Having been through a similar mill with Talawa, I somewhat understand the fear, anger and disbelief at the process.
Andy seems to be making the point that there is a fixed pool of money, from which not everyone will get enough and that some older companies may have to make way for newer companies. Perhaps, not that controversial an assertion. Further, everyone seems to agrees the ACE process could be a lot better: transparency, communication, more peer review etc.
On the other hand, if you do take the logical extreme. ACE is doing a bad job therefore we the government / ACE board should “restructure it” –> what would the new structure look like?
Proposals please.
However, the British Council with different but perhaps aligned priorities has already restructured. This is what is proposed:
“After earlier in 2007 disbanding its advisory panels in the Arts, which were made up of volunteers, the executive board of the British Council has [in Dec 2007] decided to to get rid of its departments of film, drama, dance, literature, design, and the visual arts and instead organise its cultural staff into panels with the titles Progressive Facilitation, Market Intelligence Network, Knowledge Transfer Function and Modern Pioneer.”
That’s right
-Progressive Facilitation
-Market Intelligence Network
-Knowledge Transfer Function
-Modern Pioneer
What would people make of an ACE which would have to decide upon those functional lines?