Tiffany Jenkins: Public service reform a threat to cultural assets

Published on Tuesday 6 October 2009 21:19

THE future of our museums and galleries is at risk, threatened by the Public Services Reform Bill, currently before Holyrood.

Now in committee stage, it could give the Scottish Government unprecedented powers over heritage and arts organisations, turning over historical protections designed to ensure the permanent safety of the collections.

The legislation, introduced by John Swinney, the finance secretary, is designed to reduce and streamline the number of public bodies in Scotland, aiming to create greater efficiency, by placing them under various umbrella organisations. The brolly for culture will be Creative Scotland, due to be established in the first half of 2010.

Part two of the bill gives Scottish ministers the wide-ranging power to make any provision which they consider would improve the exercise of public functions. It will allow changes to be made to public bodies through a Statutory Instrument, instead of, as now, under primary legislation.

Statutory Instruments are subject to very little parliamentary or public scrutiny, unlike primary legislation which is better interrogated. In effect, the legislation will give greater and new powers to government over public bodies and – through Creative Scotland – national collections, with limited examination.

Joint evidence, recently submitted by National Museums Scotland and National Galleries of Scotland, to the Scottish Parliament finance committee, which is considering the bill, warns that this would be a major change in the conception and practice of their organisations, considered independent, and one which could seriously damage their future.

National Museums Scotland and National Galleries of Scotland is one of the leading museum groups in Europe. Made up of five museums, they care for four million significant art works and artefacts from all over the globe spanning centuries, including the Lewis Chessman, paintings by Raphael, the national collection of Scottish art, and spectacular ancient Assyrian reliefs from Northern Iraq.

The submission explicitly cautions that this bill would make it possible for a government to change or remove the current restrictions against the sale and transfer of collections, and then could pressurise museum trustees to sell objects to raise funds.

Historically, museums and galleries have been kept at arms length from government. This is so these objects and artefacts are be held in trust for us – the public – in perpetuity, protecting collections from the vagaries of politics, fashion and financial pressures.

Paintings, objects, prints, drawings, photographs and fossils are kept away from the reach of politicians, so we can see them and can learn more about different civilisations. They are cared for in trust, not just for us, but for our children and their children.

On the whole, cultural organisations are only permitted to sell or exchange collections in rare circumstances, such as when it is a duplicate of another in their collection. Even this process has been tempered with a check that the decision is not detrimental to the interests of researchers and the public.

There are good reasons for such checks and limits. The role of museums and galleries is to record, preserve, research and display objects and art. They are not shops or businesses, and it is not their job to sell off items that they don't want now, but which researchers may use to unlock the past in decades to come.

The disposal of museum collections was anathema to the sector. But, in recent times, there have been distinct moves to flog off important work. In July, Southampton City Council decided to sell valued pieces from its permanent collection: Rodin's sculpture Crouching Woman, and Alfred Munnings' oil painting After the Race. If the contested and controversial sale goes ahead, the 5 million they could raise will be used to construct a maritime museum commemorating the sinking of the Titanic.

This attempted sale demonstrates that, in the climate of a recession and spending cuts, selling off important paintings and sculptures proves a tempting means of raising funds. Ministers may promise they won't, but once they have the power they may change their mind. It wouldn't be the first time.

Evidence to the committee, by National Museums Scotland and National Galleries of Scotland, warns that potential donors might stop if they felt the guardianship wasn't independent and that work could be sold.

Much of what is on the walls and shelves of our museums comes from private collections. They give on the understanding that the institution will care for the collection, not get rid of it.

The John Rylands University Library in Manchester learnt a difficult lesson when it sold off books in the late 1990s. Shortly after, they lost an important loan. The library has found it hard to attract donations ever since. There is no going back after a sale.

The Royal Society of Edinburgh is another of the many organisations calling for a reconsideration of the scope of the powers of the Public Services Reform Bill. They have raised concerns about the focus of Creative Scotland, anxious that it is disproportionately focused on the economic potential of the arts.

The Scottish Artists Union echoes this unease in their submission to the finance committee; warning that Creative Scotland could be aggressively commercial, encouraging the arts to be used primarily for economic outputs. This is to the detriment of art forms that don't make money but do raise our spirits.

We cannot be too careful, for we are facing difficult times. The fallout of the economic downturn is only beginning, and will impact upon public spending, corporate sponsorship and private donations for a considerable time. Our collections could be vulnerable.

The importance of the national museums and galleries, the precarious financial climate, and the probable commercial focus of Creative Scotland, is why it is important to be vigilant, to make sure that the Public Services Bill goes no further without amendment or clarification. We should fight for the independence of our museums and galleries and keep them at arms length from government.