It’s time for a rallying cry to the new government

Some saw Keir Starmer making his first speech as prime minister at London’s Tate Modern as a sign that culture will be more important to a Labour government than it frequently seemed under the Conservatives.

The previous administration often seemed more interested in stoking the culture wars than backing the arts, although many acknowledge the lifeline thrown to organisations during Covid via the Culture Recovery Fund.

New culture secretary Lisa Nandy immediately said she wanted an end to the culture wars – part of a broader message that the new administration intends to govern in a more grown-up way than the Conservatives and not be led by slogans such as “levelling-up”.

The concept has already been thrown out as an empty promise, rather than a coherent strategy to support areas that have suffered from a lack of government investment and support.

Despite positive early signs in Labour’s approach to the arts, many are reserving judgment until concrete plans emerge.

There were not many clues in the party’s election manifesto, although there was more detail in Creating Growth, a document released in March outlining Labour’s plans for the creative industries.

A shift in tone

Mark Taylor, a senior lecturer in quantitative methods at the University of Sheffield, who focuses on culture and the creative sector, says: “A lot of the output reflects a shift in tone more than a shift in policy – but that’s not to criticise the shift in tone.

A review of Arts Council England that isn’t as politically charged as the abortive [Mary] Archer review will provide opportunity for longer-term reflection.

“And an explicit commitment to equality, diversity and inclusion in the arts workforce, with a recognition that inequalities are longstanding, is a major gear shift from the last few years.

“Over the past few culture ministers, the sector’s been on the defensive in response to a series of new fronts in the culture wars coming from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. If the temperature comes down, this might mean people have a bit more space to think strategically.”

Despite the positive noises from Labour, some argue that Creating Growth contains little to address the key challenges that the arts face – notably chronic underinvestment.

Kate Oakley, a professor of culture at the University of Glasgow, says: “It’s a fairly uninspiring document, and while I understand the overall focus on growth, given the problem with living standards, when applied to the cultural sector, it just seems like warmed-over Blairism.

It doesn’t seem to grapple with some of the problems that resulted from the arts and culture policies of the last Labour government.”

For Oakley, these problems include a focus on the digital parts of the creative industries, which is where much of the growth has taken place, while most of the arts sector has been shrinking.

“As a result of the past 14 years, including Covid and the cost of living, parts of the sector are in existential crisis, and focusing on growth won’t necessarily address that,” she says. “You need a different approach and a different rationale.”

‘Cultural infrastructure’

One idea that Labour has talked about is “cultural infrastructure”. Oakley does see positives in this, particularly if it is linked to a “rights-based approach that asks what are the services, capabilities, venues and institutions that are needed to deliver a thriving cultural infrastructure”.

“But any idea of cultural infrastructure has to make way for a reinvigorated and properly funded local government, and respect for the devolution settlement,” she says.

With funding such a crucial issue, many are saying this should take priority over everything else.

“There’s a huge question for me about why Labour is still committed to a root-and-branch review of the arts council,” says Ben Walmsley, the director of the Centre for Cultural Value at the University of Leeds. “Is that really a priority when the sector is on its knees and needs some cash investment pretty quickly?”

Walmsley argues that Let’s Create – Arts Council England’s 2020-30 strategy – sits well with Labour’s ideas. And Labour has said it wants to reinvigorate the arm’s-length approach to dealing with organisations such as the arts council, as part of a wider rejection of direct government interference in culture.

“What organisations need is a cash injection, rather than big policy ideas that the sector isn’t in a state to implement,” he says.

It comes back to the issue of whether – and how – the government will find new money for the sector.

“The problem now, unlike in 1997, is the state of the economy,” says Walmsley. “Everything in Labour’s manifesto seems predicated on economic growth. And largely because of Brexit, that growth is not going to happen anytime soon.”

Relatively small amounts

While acknowledging that there is not going to be a huge cash injection, those in the arts know that relatively small amounts will make a big difference to the sector.

“The work the new Labour government needs to do in rebuilding trust and creating a culture of public service is mostly really practical – having enough hospital beds, being able to get a doctor’s appointment during your lifetime and filling in the potholes,” says Mark O’Neill, the former head of Glasgow Museums and now a museum consultant. “But every community also needs a civic place where social trust, hope and belonging can be built.

“Museums in some cities – for example, Liverpool and Glasgow – already carry out this vital function, which is symbolic but also very practical. There is no other institution in society that is distributed widely enough and has the cultural resources to relate the past to the present in ways that can make this happen.

“The Labour government may regard museums as a second-order priority, but a small amount of funding could release vast untapped potential in museums to help them realise their vision of society.”

As ever, the trick will be advocating to politicians, so they understand why museums matter and what they need to carry out their work effectively. With a new culture secretary in post, plus a huge raft of new young MPs spread across the UK, now is a good time to make the case.

“It’s a time for the sector to be proactive,” says Walmsley. “We sometimes sit back and wait, and kind of complain from the sidelines, or are introspective and speak just to each other. But now it’s time for a rallying cry – and not just for more money, but to offer solutions and come up with a clear strategy for how the sector wants to develop.”

Change of tack could see an end to the culture wars

Lisa Nandy’s first speech as culture secretary signified a very different approach from the previous government

“For too long, for too many people, the story we tell ourselves, about ourselves as a nation, has not reflected them, their communities or their lives. This is how polarisation, division and isolation thrives. In recent years, we’ve found multiple ways to divide ourselves from one another. And we’ve lost that sense of a self-confident, outward-looking country that values its own people in every part of the UK. Changing that is the mission of this department. The era of culture wars is over.”

Lisa Nandy’s first speech as culture secretary signified a very different approach from the previous government.

But for many in the cultural sector, just having a culture secretary who is committed to culture would be progress – under the Conservatives, there were 12 culture secretaries in 14 years.

By contrast, between 1997 and 2010, under the last Labour administration, there were five culture secretaries, including Chris Smith, who was in post for four years and Tessa Jowell, who did a six-year stint.

Thangham Debbonaire was expected to be the new culture secretary, but she lost her Bristol Central seat to the Green Party in the election, and Nandy was handed the role.

For those looking to understand Nandy, her contribution to a 2015 publication called Labour’s Identity Crisis: England and the Politics of Patriotism provides some useful pointers. This was edited by Tristram Hunt, now the director of the Victoria and Albert Museum, when he was the MP for Stoke-on-Trent.

In the book, Nandy reflects on how she is comfortable with multiple overlapping identities, reflecting the fact that she was born in Manchester and now represents Wigan as an MP.

She said she feels proud to be both English and British, citing important historical landmarks such as the 1819 Peterloo massacre, and the Levellers and Diggers movements of the 17th century. She also mentioned Danny Boyle’s London Olympics opening ceremony and the positive impact of immigration.

Nandy wrote: “Maybe it’s because my dad’s from India, born and raised in Calcutta, that I’m so aware of how many aspects of our language, our food and the oddities of our national character have been shaped by the role that we’ve played in the world, and the impact that the rest of the world has had on us – through our membership of the United Kingdom, through our membership and leading role in the empire, and through the influence of others today.

“In the past, we may have been uneasy about those aspects of identity in Labour and on the left; we may have misunderstood or even sought to deny their importance. But there’s another risk, which is that we end up pitting those loyalties against one another, rather than seeking to see them as part of the messy multitude of conflicting, overlapping identities that we all hold within ourselves.”