On Friday the 12th of January 2007 the Scottish Artists Union will participate
in a
parliamentary debate on the Draft Culture Bill. Hosted by Chris Ballance MSP
and Chaired
by Joyce MacMillan, the event is our first opportunity to respond fomally to the
document,
alongside the Musician's Union, Equity, the Society of Authors, Voluntary Arts
Scotland,
COSLA and representatives from the Scottish Executive. At the time of writing
it remains
uncertain whether or not the Minister for Tourism, Culture & Sport will accept
her
invitation to participate.

I append below the text of my statement I'll make on your behalf tomorrow
morning. It
will be made available on our official website in due course, as well as being
submitted to
the office of Patricia Ferguson MSP.

"On behalf of the Scottish Artists Union, let me thank Chris Ballance for the
opportunity to
participate in today's debate. For those unfamiliar with our organisation, the
SAU is the
first new trade union of the 21st century, open to professional visual artists
of all
disciplines, supported entirely by membership subscriptions and as such is the
only
independent representative voice for visual artists in the country. When
responding to the
Cultural Commission's report in 2005, our aspirations for future cultural
legislation in
Scotland were encapsulated as follows:
o Give artists parity with other arts professionals
o Support artists' grassroots creativity and energy
o Increase financial support to culture in line with the great aspirations the
government
has expressed for it.
This third point was a reference to the First Minister's now infamous St.
Andrew's Day
speech of 2003, in which he said: "I intend that this country [should have] the
courage and
the faith to back human imagination, our innate creativity, as the most potent
force for
individual change and social vision."
He also said: "Culture should be for the many not the few. And the few must not
be the
only ones to experience OR CREATE [my emphasis] the most brilliant productions
or the
most outstanding works of art. It is absolutely central to my politics that
excellence should
be accessible and access should be to excellence."
How precisely his speech's sentiments- the notion of Culture being at the heart
of every
aspect of government and participation therein being a fundamental, inalienable
right of
every Scottish citizen- were reflected in the findings of the subsequent Culture
Commission is open to debate. Whether you agreed with all its recommendations
(and we
didn't), the Report was unquestionably the result of extensive consultation and
consideration and was a serious attempt to meet the ambitions of the
Commission's remit.

The question before us today is whether this draft Bill is a worthy response to
all the work
of the last three years. Have all the promises to redraw the landscape been
met? Does it
hand down a legacy that will revolutionise Scottish cultural provision for the
next quarter-
decade? The answer is resoundingly no: even a cursory reading of the Bill
reveals an
unbalanced document, singularly lacking in ambition. A closer interpretation
suggests
worrying ramifications for Scotland's cultural future and in particular her
already
marginalised and under-funded artists.

I wish to address my comments to the two principal portions of the Bill, both of
which
have the potential for great impact on our members- "Cultural Entitlements" and
the new
Creative Scotland agency.
"Cultural Entitlements" are, as we see them, a red herring and a
misinterpretation of the
First Minister's sentiments. Using the language of social inclusion the Bill
turns culture
into an inert commodity and a convenient panacea, to be simply allocated or
prescribed.
Of course the notion of "entitlement" to enjoy and participate in culture is a
noble one and
should be protected. However it's hardly radical, and as described in the Bill
makes no
mention of the rights of the creators and providers of said culture to make a
decent living
doing so. It's common sense that the people of Scotland want more enriching,
educating
and entertaining cultural experiences and it goes without saying that Scotland's
artists are
willing to provide them, given the chance to thrive. However the Bill's authors
have
chosen not to make the connection, instead making it a statutory requirement of
Local
Authorities to provide the former and not the latter. We're particularly
concerned that a
greater reliance on visual and applied artists (most especially, but no doubt
musicians,
performers and others too) to meet "entitlement" goals will lead to further
pressure on and
from Local Authorities to prioritise the provision of opportunities for audience
participation ahead of genuine cultural development and proper remuneration for
the
creative talent involved.

Equally, we're baffled as to why the Bill appears to be formalising a two tier
vision where
the National Companies (including Creative Scotland) are directly responsible to
the
Executive with everything else apparently delivered through Local Authority
management
schemes, yet also states that these cherished entitlements "are not guarantees".
The
Scottish people cannot assume that, living in any given area, they can expect
access to any
given service. Nor do the Local Authorities need to do any more than "have
regard to" the
Bill when formulating their cultural planning. Is this truly a Bill (i.e. an
attempt to create
new laws), or merely a set of guidelines? In this regard the Bill appears to be
a paper
exercise that could easily come into effect with no tangible change at the
grassroots, with
the local resident having nor more or less access to culture and the local
artist having no
more or less opportunity to deliver it than today.

Meanwhile, we are given an ill-defined account of Creative Scotland, leaving us
wondering
how it will operate or, crucially, whether it will be an improvement on the
current
arrangements. Under the terms of this Bill, it appears Creative Scotland will
be like
nothing more than a new Scottish Development Agency for the arts, with special
emphasis
on "Creative Industries". While we support the ambition of a thriving Creative
Industries
Sector we have greater interest and concern for the creative individual who
seems to have
been largely forgotten or ignored. We learn that the eight-to-fifteen members
of Creative
Scotland will all be Ministerial appointments. Ministers will decide who
Chairs, for how
long members may serve, how much they'll be paid, where they will headquarter
themselves, as well as reserving the right to attend any and all meetings. The
truth is this,
like all the other National Companies, this body will have the shadow of
Ministerial
influence and possible veto hanging over it, thanks to legislation that removes
the arms
length control previously enshrined and so highly valued by the
independently-minded
arts sector. I quote page 7 of the Draft Culture (Scoland) Bill document,
paragraph 3.11:
"The draft Bill also includes a power for the Scottish Ministers to give
directions to Creative
Scotland which they must follow."

The accompanying text does go on, in more than one place, to emphasise
Ministers'
reluctance to make decisions on what does and does not constitute the kind of
"talent and
excellence" deserving of Creative Scotland's support, recognition or reward.
However it
appears likely that, considering the importance the Executive has placed on the
economic
contribution to be made from "the creative industries" as well as to Scotland's
reputation
on the world stage, Creative Scotland will be positioned from the outset to
prioritise
commercially-minded initiatives (we note computer games are given special
mention),
"established" (ie big name) artists and large-scale, populist projects. While
there is
certainly a case to be made for more cultural programming with broad appeal
(dovetailing
as it does with the concept of "entitlement"), there is every indication that
the
overwhelming majority of visual artists in Scotland will not be in a position to
benefit in
any meaningful way from Creative Scotland's largesse. We believe artistic
practice must
not be judged and supported purely in terms of benefit to the community and/or
economy. If culture is to be placed at the heart of the nation, then artists'
rights must be
placed at the heart of our thinking on culture.

In our view, the single most important omission of the Bill as presented is its
failure to
recognise that the true source of cultural development is the creative
individual. The
National Companies, our Local Authorities and- should its day dawn- Creative
Scotland
will have nothing to deliver without a flourishing source of creative talent.
This Bill is
appears to be concerned solely with the management and control of the delivery
of culture
as a commodity with no real commitment to nurturing, developing or celebrating
the
creative, innovative individuals from whence it all springs."

Terry Anderson
President
Scottish Artists Union