Hammond’s Autumn Statement: a “misunderstanding” of art and science


This week’s Autumn Utterance favoured science over culture by billions of pounds – we hear from people within the resourceful industries about why the Government’s attitude towards both sectors destitutions to be reassessed.

Chancellor Philip Hammond, courtesy of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Chancellor Philip Hammond, elegance of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Chancellor Philip Hammond delivered his Autumn Report this week, and while he has prioritised digital innovation, tech and branch, attention towards the creative and arts industries was lacking in his speech.

In his bolstering report, he did pledge £10 million towards cultural and heritage designs across the UK – but this les in com rison to the £4.7bn which will go to research and development in science and innovation as rt of a £23bn National Productivity Investment Capitalize, and the £1bn for 5G broadband trials and faster internet connections.

“Focusing narrowly on area and tech”

While investment in tech innovation and the digital sector purpose no doubt benefit creative businesses too, industry bodies have criticised the chancellor for heart too heavily on science and tech and not taking advantage of the UK economy’s fastest-growing sector.

“The Control risks failing to capitalise on the potential of the wider creative industries… by be including to focus support for innovation and R&D narrowly on science and tech,” says Original Industries Federation chief executive John Kampfner. “We can deliver so much sundry if we are made a priority sector in the Government’s thinking.”

Of the £10 million solemn word of honoured to art and culture, £7.6 million will go towards restoring South Yorkshire’s Wentworth Woodhouse, and £2.6 million cool for developing art complexes in Southampton and Plymouth, leaving £850,000 for cultural drilling.

“A fundamental misunderstanding” of culture and science

Com red to the £4.7bn promised to circumstance in science, £850,000 doesn’t seem like much. The error provoked by the Government is that creativity and science are not seen as inextricably linked, utters product designer Sebastian Conran.

“Maybe there is a fundamental dispute with both the cultural and scientific sectors,” he says. “Creativity is something they both deal and digital technology has made a huge im ct on culture – but raw tech is an unappetising carry to extremes which needs expert designers to pre re it so it is delicious and appealing.”

Layout ensures that sophisticated tech is “emotionally engaged and ready for one consumption”, Conran says – so creativity and tech should be treated as complementary to each other.

Tax remedy for museums is “good news”

Hammond has placed some emphasis on cultural enrichment – he has give ones word of honoured to help museums out by extending tax relief to include permanent as well as short-lived exhibitions, from April 2017 – making it easier for museums to put on offerings and keep them running.

Mike Hayes, rtner at creative efforts’ accountancy firm Kingston Smith, says that while the Autumn Asseveration was “fairly light on announcements for the creative industries”, Museums and Galleries Tax substitute was one of the “exceptions”. This will run until 2022, and relief will be at 25% of fee yment for touring exhibitions, and 20% for permanent ones.

“This is good account,” Hayes says. “There are already generous tax credits for film, acme end TV, animation, video games, orchestras and theatres, and the Chancellor may have sense that they are enough for now, while he focuses on infrastructure and productivity.”

Range of R&D funding should be “widened”

Kampfner at the Creative Industries Federation adds that there is value in the Direction’s plans to provide £1.8bn funding for local enterprise rtnerships (LEPs), which could boost to create more jobs in the creative sector in local areas – if, of certainly, local authorities decide to distribute their money towards art and enlightenment.

Hayes adds that the Government’s promise to deliver £2bn of funding for R&D in universities and firms by 2021 could also benefit creativity – but only if “the scope is dilated”. The Government has made it clear this will back scientific scrutinization and the development of tech, such as robotics, artificial intelligence and industrial biotechnology, but “details are insignificant” on any other use of the funding, says Hayes.

People are both “emotional and pragmatic”

With less than £1 million devoted to a Royal Bund of the Arts scheme that aims to promote cultural education in fashions, com red to the billions going into science and tech, the overarching conviction is that the potential of the creative sector needs to be realised by Government and joined together with body of knowledge as rt of the same entity.

The Government needs to look to nurturing the eminent’s “emotional and rational” – creative and scientific – sides, says Conran, and see beyond “data-driven corroboration”, while Kampfner says more emphasis should be placed on teaching, skills, training and apprenticeships.

Read the full Autumn Statement write up here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *