To think that £1 billion of tax payers money spent on the arts in this country really only serves a minority

[goodnessgracious]

AIBU to think that organisations such as The Royal Opera House (they receive 26 million a year) should be self funding and not relying on tax payers money.

I would have thought that arts funding should be to support up and coming arts or at least arts that will benefit all of society. I really don't understand why certain organisations receive so much help from tax payers?

Coffee of course a billion pounds could lift children out of poverty. What I said was that shutting the ROH wouldn't. The money wouldn't go to the children as they are not the priority for those in power. The subsidy cut would lead to more tax breaks for the (relatively) rich in my opinion.

cardi

The Opera subsidy is a tax break for the relatively rich.

Op YABU.

I am relatively poor, but my children are all involved with the performing arts. My children all perform. As a previous poster said, there are ballet classes fit to bursting with tiny tots in tutus, some of which could go on to perform on stage at the royal opera house one day.

Two of my own children have performed at Sadlers Wells theatre, and it was a real highlight for them both.

Without arts funding many enrichment programmes, outreach programmes, oppurtunities for young people just wouldn't be there. Talented children/young people from poorer backgrounds (like my own) would never be able to develop their talents.

The ROH is an iconic building in its own right, a tourism attraction, and as others have already said it has a good return for the tax payers money. Has anyone found accurate figures for what it generates, compared to what it gets? And how much of that goes back into the treasury? I'd find that interesting reading!

YABU OP.

According to an independent report, the arts contribute £5.9 billion to the UK economy, and make up 0.4% of GDP on less than 0.1% of public spending. Sounds like a good deal to me.

www.thestage.co.uk/news/2013/05/arts-worth-5-9bn-to-uk-economy-report/

crazyspaniel we need a like button. Excellent post.

Following my earlier post about our visit to the Globe I think YANBU BTW - because I think the arts should make more effort to reach out to all sectors of society/ different communities to make the arts more accessible to all. The Globe did OK, at least they have a more affordable tour and exhibition option suitable for families in particular (and apparently some reasonably priced tickets for each performance) but I think they could be doing more to introduce the actual words/writings of Shakespeare to all

We can all benefit from Arts funding.I live in the North West so an in no way a Metropolitan opera buff but I love taking DD to galleries, museums, theatres, The Halle, BBC Philharmonic etc.All these organizations get government Arts funding. Yes, we buy tickets and put money in the collections of the places that are "free" but it's worth every penny.

Juggling why are the actual words of Shakespeare inaccessible to anyone? There are free libraries, and online resources (also free) to anyone interested. Why do you feel people need to be spoonfed? Or worse, forcefed?

Seriously, what more do you think they could do?

Hi cingo - whilst at the Globe with my DC and DF the other day, as part of the tour, I would have liked to see an actor or a pair of actors recite/play a speech or short dialogue to us from one of Shakespeare's most famous sections.

I don't see why this would be spoon-feeding or force-feeding us at all. We'd all gone to the Globe to learn more about England's most famous bard, and his words were written for performance after all

Re. making Shakespeare accessible: to give just a couple of examples, the RSC and the National Theatre do live broadcasts to cinemas (as does the ROH) across the country and, in the case of the RSC, into schools. The RSC in particular has done tonnes of works training teachers to engage pupils with Shakespeare's work. In addition both companies do a great deal of outreach work. What's not accessible about that?

Ok Juggling point taken. Why don't you write to the Globe and suggest exactly that? I'm sure it will be taken on board. They are trying to engage as broad an audience as possible and would appreciate the feedback.

Hoping they might see it here (do you work there?!) - but perhaps I might write with feedback when back from hols.

I think arts should get funding
But if it's royal, the monarchy should support them
Oh sorry, fail in my argument there

Opera and ballets are extremely niche interests that mainly upper middle class and above people go to watch. Opera yanbu.

Ha! I WISH I worked there. The Globe wouldn't necessarily see it on Mumsnet, and I think it's a point worth raising with them. I think they genuinely take feedback on board - that's my experience anyway.

OP is it just "big ticket" such as the ROH, Royal Shakespeare, ballet etc that concern you or all arts?

If the first not sure (can make a case about cultural capital) but if all arts YABVU.

I've taken part in the past in a small community arts organisation set up in a, er, "less wealthy" part of Scotland (deprived but improving, we like to think). We all paid our £3 every week (less for folk on benefits), practiced together, and it brought people together from all parts of the community, from teenagers to OAPs. It wasn't done to equip people with the skills needed for business (bloody hell, I can't even imagine what kind of business that would be) but for community cohesion, so people could meet others, and have fun together. And we were proud of it and got to the stage where other people might want to watch us without screaming and running away.

Thing is, the halls we practiced in and played in were, by and large, subsidised as to their running costs. All kinds of community acts were there and some of them got grants and others not but all of them were indirectly subsidised. Some went on to great things and some just happily playing around in their local areas, but it was a good thing on many levels. If you got rid of that, I think a community under pressure would be doing so much worse.

There is a big issue with Arts Spending in this country and that 50p website shows exactly why. There is over £70 per person per week spent on the Arts in London and then the next highest area is Middleborough where they spend 55p pppw. Why the fuck is the richest part of the country getting 140x more spending per person than the next highest area (a very deprived Area that benefits massively from the Arts spending that does happen there)? Why don't they half all grants in London (where there is a massive international audience who are able to afford high prices) and spend a bit more in the regions to spread the benefits of the Arts beyond the M25.

I live in an area that spends 16p per person, we use to have the largest Arts Centre in the North until the council closed it becauses of lack of funding (it needed £1M a year, bet the ROH wouldn't even miss that). It was the lifeblood of the local town, lots of evening classes took place there, lots of kids activities. There was a great cafe, a lovely independent cinema, and we had regular performances of first rate children's theatre (Theatre Hullabuloo was based in the Arts Centre) that were cheap. All that is gone, for just a few pence a week. I can just imagine how fantastic the arts scene would be here if we had £70 a week spent on our Arts.

Floozey that's your perception, which I doubt is true - the last time I went to the opera I was up in the cheap seats and it was a real mixed boisterous crowd - hardly "upper middle class". And even if you're correct (which I'm not sure you are), why does it being "upper middle class" mean it's shit?

I hate this idea that some cultural pursuits are off-limits because of some outdated and ridiculous notions of class.

BTW, I'm from a working class family. My father saved up to take me to the symphony because he thought it was important. He didn't EVER want me to think that this stuff wasn't for people like us.

It's not London in general. It's the city of London. The square mile. Which has a teeny tiny number of residents but is the home to several concert venues including the barbican centre. It is also incredibly rich, because despite having very very few residents, it receives shedloads of revenue from the businesses based in the city.

What a sad thread!
I work for ENO and OP you will be thrilled to hear that our funding has been cut dramatically.
We do lots of education and outreach work btw.

Also I should point out that our cheapest seats actually have the best acoustics. To be so high and far above the stage but to hear the words is pretty amazing.

Ok here's another perspective - from someone who has worked in opera behind the scenes. And learnt to love it too.

The term 'opera' means a piece of work- it comes originally from the quest to create a pice of work incorporating the pinnacle of achievement in all fields - composition, musicianship, conducting, directing, art - (or scenography).

The people that work in opera today are still there for that very reason - they are he best in their field.

You not I may not visit the opera regularly (though I would say everyone should have that chance) - but here's the thing: all those people who have had the chance to hone their skills on something that aspires so high also use their skills elsewhere. If you've seen a Hollywood film, watched a west end show, seen a regional repertory performance, enjoyed any performance of classical music, or watched any dance performances, then you have benefitted from the existence of that powerhouse of creativity.

I totally agree it's expensive, and I totally agree that it's an aquired taste, but it's about a sophisticated society wanting that crucible of talent to exist....

Rabbit even if you look at all of London the spend per person is still massively more than the rest of the country.BBC Report

The Arts Council invests about 3 billion a year - roughly 1 billion from National Lottery, not from the government

I bet Alan Davey (CEO of Arts Council England) wishes he had a budget this big! The 5 year budget is around 3 billion, rather than the annual budget and ACE's remit has included museums and libraries since 2011. Local authorities also invest in the arts and culture but public investment has reduced massively since 2010.

Take a look at how ACE invests its funding from the info on its website. It invests in much more than just opera and ballet.