How Can UK Institutions Survive the Funding Crisis?

Andrew Durbin We’re facing a severe funding crisis in the arts in England. According to Nicolas Serota, investment in the arts has been at a ‘standstill’ since 2010 – museums are struggling, galleries are struggling, artists are struggling.

Aaron Cezar The funding crisis is disastrous, and it comes after so many cuts and restrictions on the arts during 14 years of Tory rule, the COVID-19 pandemic and inflation. In real terms, public spending on the arts has been hugely reduced – and it was already lower in the UK than in our European counterpart countries. On top of this, the current government has done little to reduce the exodus of non-doms, some of whom are important philanthropists; one could argue that their donations to arts organisations in major cities allowed for more public funding towards smaller, regional organisations. At the core of this trend is a lack of insight into how the arts work as an eco-system, and how we can be effectively resourced.

AD When people hear the words ‘funding crisis’, it can seem abstract. Before we touch on the solutions, I wonder if you could speak to what this looks like for artists and institutions right now?

AC Quite simply, a reduction in opportunities that threatens the livelihoods of artists and artworkers. But it is not just their seat at the table that is at risk – the whole table is wobbly right now. Arts institutions, both large and small, face uncertainty, or in some cases closure. Without spaces where people can gather, communicate and connect, our communities will become more and more isolated. I am a trustee of All Change, an arts charity based in Islington, and I have seen first-hand the strain on organisations trying to deliver more activities with fewer resources in communities affected by cuts to cultural spending, social services and other vital needs.

AD But how do we ensure artists are being heard in the halls of power? Because that seems to be the biggest issue when it is the government that is turning off the tap.

CZ I think Keir Starmer intuitively understands the value of the arts. Before the election, Labour brought together the arts community, and made clear that they value the arts. They heard our demands, our concerns, our proposals – we talked about education, visas, tax incentives for philanthropy. But the question is: how do we ensure these are taken into account?

AD I wonder whether Starmer and the government really understand what artists are facing. There is a great irony in Labour celebrating its 2024 election victory at the Tate Modern, only for them to advance legislation on AI that puts artists’ copyright and ownership of their own work at risk. Do you think they’re acting in good faith?

CZ Given what the government inherited, the problem is one of competing priorities. But also, I think there's a lack of understanding about what the arts can actually do, and how they can be integrated in a number of conversations and solutions, from climate change to health. At Delfina we have hosted residencies with artists exploring urgent issues from the politics of food to the complicated relationship between technology and mental well-being. There are a raft of studies showing how much our health is improved by interacting with art and the creative process, for example. It is hard to convince people that artists and the arts are a priority for investment, if they are always seen in isolation, and not as an integral part of how we rebuild our economy and sustain our communities.

AD Delfina emphasizes this – community. Do you think we should be advocating for art as a lived experience, rather than something you see on a wall or behind glass?

CZ We need both, but we should be more confident in arguing for the transformative potential of art alongside the economic impact. Campaign for the Arts and other groups have produced all kinds of detailed studies on things like the return on investment in the arts; we literally have the receipts. The question is, are we making the case collectively and in the right way?

AD We’re coming to the end of this neoliberal era, and populism isn’t really interested in statistics, or metrics. So much of our politics is based on feeling. And despite the arts being a great purveyor of feeling, it seems to me that we're disadvantaged at this point – we’re arguing our case using language we were never very comfortable with, that no longer has the same kind of political saliency.

CZ That might be true. Maybe we should lean more fully into the arts’ ability to help us process and make sense of those feelings. You mentioned how Delfina emphasises community – we gather artists and thinkers and give them time, space and support to ask difficult questions, exchange ideas and imagine alternatives across different cultures and lived experiences. This work doesn’t always translate into policy briefs or economic reports, but that’s the point. The outcomes – the art they create – resonate in ways data can’t. They provoke, move and make space for ambiguity and complexity.

That’s why we keep going. Despite funding cuts, artists are still making work, forming connections and opening space for us to feel and reimagine. It’s not enough to advocate for the arts. We need to reframe the conversation: art isn’t just a sector, it’s a lifeline.

^{Main image: Liz Glynn, performance as part of Frieze London 2018, supported by Delfina Foundation. Courtesy Linda Nylind / Frieze; photograph: Linda Nylind}