After a decade of austerity, councils need a new way to fund culture

The Millennium Centre for the performing arts, Cardiff. Image: Getty.

The Labour leader of Cardiff council explains why he helped launch the Cultural Cities Enquiry.

Within living memory, the landscapes of Britain’s core cities have been transformed. Once smog-filled bastions of heavy industry, they have faced down the spectre of managed decline, and emerged as vibrant hubs, dominated by the knowledge economy and services. While each city responded differently to the challenges of deindustrialisation, the role of culture in regeneration has been a consistent theme.

Glasgow’s European City of Culture programme in 1990 was a turning point for that city, as it was for Liverpool in 2008. In Cardiff, sports and culture were brilliantly and inventively used to transform the city – culminating in our hosting of the UEFA Champions League Final and being named the UK’s first Music City. Across our cities, a buzzing cultural scene has become a major part of what makes our cities such great places to live, particularly for the young, creative people who are so vital in the 21st century economy.

As a result of this transformation, modern Britain is a global creative powerhouse. Go to any country in the world and you will meet people who listen to music, play video games, read books, watch films and plays created in our cities. The creative economy is one of our most important export industries, accounting for almost 10 per cent of the UK’s GVA and around 2.5m jobs.

Building creativity into our education system, as we are doing in Cardiff, creates children who are able to think differently to adapt and to invent, who will be able to respond best to challenges like automation that are already disrupting the jobs market. 

But the benefits of culture are not restricted to the balance sheet. Culture is about people and the places they live. It brings us together. It creates shared experiences and strengthens bonds between people and communities, so important when there are some – a tiny, tiny minority – who are trying to do the opposite, by creating division and spreading hate. 


Culture and the arts can make a massive positive difference across all aspects of city-life, culture – but this is now under threat. A decade of austerity has left the financial model which underpins culture in British cities creaking at the seams.

It will soon be in crisis. New solutions and radical changes are needed, recognising the simple truth that the traditional approach to funding and supporting culture in the Core Cities is broken.  

Organisations like the one I lead are contending with spiraling demand and shrinking resources. Public sector investment has long been the backbone of UK cultural provision, but after a decade of austerity we cannot fund it the way we used to.

The challenge is compounded as technology changes the way culture is consumed, and the persistent blight of inequality leaves a significant proportion of our most disadvantaged communities with limited access to the arts.

That is why the time is right for the Cultural Cities Enquiry. The enquiry will bring together cities, UK arts councils, and leaders from a range of sectors to consider how we can ensure our cities remain world-leaders for culture and creativity. 

Our aim is to create a set of practical recommendations that will enable city leaders and cultural institutions to make the best use of available resources and set up new channels of investment.

Successive governments haven’t yet provided the tools to realise the economic potential of cities and they haven’t fully unlocked their cultural potential either.

Given the right policy levers, cities can add to the UK’s formidable reputation as a creative powerhouse. We know that greater local flexibilities are key to success – yet UK cities currently control only 5-7 per cent of their tax base. This is five times less than the OECD average and ten times less than US cities.

The Basque city of Bilbao, for example, secured the Guggenheim Museum because its city government had freedoms on local spending and tax retention that UK cities can only dream of.

In New York the development of leading cultural institutions – Including the Museum of Modern Art and the Metropolitan Museum – were carried out through a local trust. This allowed for culture bonds, triple tax-exempt debt and borrowing to fund growth.

Our cities are already experimenting with new approaches. Newcastle recently helped Live Theatre build a new headquarters by offering a loan at preferential rates; Bristol struck a new deal with funding agencies; while Nottingham and Sheffield both invested in creative industries quarters, stimulating the local economy. But, given the scale of the funding challenge, we are a long way from where we need to be.   

This enquiry, that will report its findings this autumn, is the vital first step on a journey towards a new and sustainable way of funding culture in our major cities – where creativity can flourish, and where the transforming power of the arts can be enjoyed by all our citizens.

Cllr Huw Thomas is leader of Cardiff council. To find out more about and submit evidence to the Cultural Cities Enquiry, click here.

 
 
 
 

Is Manchester doing enough to fight its air pollution crisis?

Clouds over Manchester. Image: Getty.

In June 2018, think tank IPPR released a report calling Greater Manchester’s pollution levels “lethal and illegal”. The report called on mayor Andy Burnham to urgently ramp up measures to improve air quality and for central government to give him the tools to do so.

Yet one year on, the Northern Quarter Forum has had to fight tooth and nail to close Stevenson Square to traffic for just five hours to celebrate Clean Air Week. This, coupled with the Great Ancoats Street fiasco – a multi-million pound plan to create a “European style boulevard” without any cycle infrastructure – raises red flags.

So what’s actually being done to fight Manchester’s air pollution crisis – and is it enough?

An ambitious pledge

Andy Burnham has pledged to make Manchester a leading green city in Europe. It’s an ambitious goal, considering central Manchester currently has the highest rate of emergency admissions for asthma in England – over double the national average – and Manchester is the second-worst council area in England for inhalable particulate matter. Greater Manchester is also the most congested region outside of London, with 152 roads in breach of legal NO2 levels.

The 152 roads in breach of air pollution levels. Image: TfGM.

 

All in all, 1,200 lives are lost each year due to air pollution. If that number is to be brought down to zero, Manchester better look for inspiration.

Oslo, European Green Capital 2019, prioritises pedestrians and cyclists in the city centre, and is transitioning to a completely car-free city centre. All public transport will run on renewable energy from 2020, and over 700 on-street parking spaces were removed, replaced with cycle lanes, pocket parks, and seating areas. Since the 1980’s Oslo has had tolled ring roads, and in 2017 introduced a further congestion charge.

The message is clear: becoming a leading green city means reducing the number of vehicles on the road. Switching to electric cars won’t be enough to save us, because worn tyres and brakes produce particulate matter, the micro plastic particles penetrating the deepest parts of our lungs and bloodstream.

What’s required, instead, is improved public transport – currently often both less convenient and more expensive than driving – as well as prioritising walking and cycling.

So with Burnham’s ambitious – and worthy – pledge in mind, let’s see what Manchester is doing.

Is enough being invested in public transport?

Last year, Burnham revealed his “Congestion Deal”, which includes a £122m Bus Priority Package (shepherding 9,000 more passengers a week) and spending £83m on 27 new trams. The deal also commits 40,000 more seats on commuter trains, and trebles the number of electric vehicle charging points in the region to 1,000.

Manchester’s Clean Air Plan also includes £116m government funded schemes for HGV’s, buses, taxis, and businesses upgrading to cleaner vehicles, as well as loans with preferential rates for those taking advantage of the funds.

While that may look like a lot of investment, it pales in comparison to the nearly £6bn being considered on road schemes. Moreover, research has repeatedly shown the benefits of road expansion are short-lived, “inducing” more car journeys leading to increased congestion and pollution overall.

The biggest cue for public transport in Manchester is Burnham’s recent proposal to franchise buses, bringing them back under public control. This will allow GMCA to develop a truly integrated public transport system and ensure all communities are served, not just those that are most profitable. It will also allow them to set the fares, bringing them in line with those in London; whereas it costs £4 in Greater Manchester for a single bus fare, the rate is currently capped at £1.50 in the capital.

That being said, there’s still a pressing need for more funding. When I asked the Clean Air Plan folk at Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) what’s the one thing government could do to help, they told me this: “To agree a devolved multi-year transport funding settlement with Greater Manchester” that includes ongoing funding, “to help us to transform public transport services to meet modern expectations as people experience in other cities across Europe.”

Despite the progress being made, as long as central government doesn’t provide new funds – and the bulk of existing funding is pumped into motorways instead – Manchester won’t become a leading green city.


Is walking and cycling being prioritised?

Burnham’s Congestion Deal also outlined a “Streets for All” approach, in which streets would be designed “for all road users” to enable alternatives to driving.

Chris Boardman became Greater Manchester’s first Walking and Cycling Commissioner in 2017 with an initial £160m earmarked to begin creating “Bee Network” safe cycle routes throughout the city – making Manchester a truly European city. That funding has now been allocated, and the first projects are coming to fruition.

However, it only accounts for 11 per cent of the £1.5bn needed to complete the Bee Network, and Boardman along with five other leading cycling commissioners are demanding government commit long-term funding to safe cycle infrastructure.

Boardman calls painted bike lanes a “waste of public money”, which encourage drivers to speed up, endangering cyclists. “Actual” bike infrastructure is needed, such as segregated cycle lanes.

He’s pointed out that government has recently agreed to spend £1.4bn on upgrading a roundabout near Bedford and building a new 10-mile dual carriageway – two projects that together may save drivers 10 minutes of travel. For the same price, Manchester could have a fully integrated cycle network that would revolutionise the way people travel around the city. Central and local government simply aren’t prioritising the measures needed to reduce air pollution.

That’s why Manchester City Council’s announcement of the £9.1m “Great Ancoats Street improvement scheme” – maintaining five lanes of motor traffic with no cycle infrastructure along one of the city’s most polluted and dangerous thoroughfares – has provoked anger and despair.

Cyclists protest on Great Ancoats Street. Image: David Saddington/author provided.

The council’s justification – “This scheme does not incorporate a segregated cycleway, as we need to balance the needs of different road users” – Illustrates a business-as-usual mindset of car dominated planning. It’s completely at odds with the scale of the challenge Manchester faces in turning around its air quality crisis.

There’s also a long way to go towards prioritising walking and cycling in the city centre. When Manchester City Council refused permission to close Stevenson Square to traffic for just five hours for the community to celebrate Clean Air Week, Northern Quarter Forum members took matters into their own hands.

They developed a plan to reroute the 13 buses that traverse Lever Street and presented it to the Highways department (essentially having done their job for them). Then it was actually Labour party councillor Angeliki Stogia who took the reins and pushed the request through.

Apart from Stogia, this lack of support for a resident’s group advancing what should be the council’s agenda is troubling. This, along with Great Ancoats Street, suggests a council not taking a “Streets for All” approach seriously, wand lacks the will to prioritise alternatives to driving in the city centre.

Is a congestion charge being introduced?

In the past year, the main focus has been developing a “Clean Air Zone”, covering all of Greater Manchester. The scheme would charge the most polluting buses, taxis, heavy and lights goods vehicles entering the zone.

This Clean Air Zone isn’t a congestion charge because it doesn’t charge polluting private vehicles. However, congestion charges are shown to be highly effective.

When Stockholm introduced its congestion charge 11 years ago, it was dubbed “the most expensive way ever devised to commit political suicide.” The charge began with just 25 per cent public approval – but when congestion dropped by 20 per cent, public opinion changed rapidly. After a seven month trial period, a referendum made the scheme permanent, and public approval now stands near 70 per cent. Revenue from the scheme has funded new metro lines and active travel improvements.

TfGM argue that charging private cars will hurt the poorest in society. However, ONS data show that while nearly all households in the richest 10 per cent by income own a car, just a third of those in the lowest 10 per cent own one. And nearly all homeowners have at least one car, compared to less than half of households in social housing.

In reality, households on lower incomes are far more likely to rely on public transport, and are disproportionately impacted by poor air quality.

The elephant in the room: the airport

Burnham has pledged to make Greater Manchester carbon neutral by 2038.

It’s difficult to imagine how this is possible, considering that Manchester Airport – 65 per cent owned by Manchester City Council – is expanding. Over the next 20 years, it plans to double passenger numbers.

Globally, aviation emissions are growing so quickly that by 2020 they’re projected to be 70 per cent higher than in 2005 and are currently 26 per cent higher than in 2013. If it were a country, global aviation emissions would be within the top 10 emitters. Here in Manchester, Pete Abel of Manchester Friends of the Earth says the current airport expansion plans would blow “our carbon budget twice over”.

A lack of follow-through

The stakes are high, the consequences dire. Strong, decisive action is required to rid Manchester of its poisonous air.

While Burnham has the vision, he doesn’t have the power. Without buy-in and consistent action from the 10 councils as well as central government, there’s only so much that can be accomplished – and it won’t be enough.

Public transport must become convenient and cheaper than driving. All city streets must enable walking and cycling. Mancunians – as well as city dwellers around the country – must hold elected representatives to account, let them know "business as usual" is no longer acceptable, and demand action to match the rhetoric.

An earlier version of this article was originally published by Manchester Confidential