Is funding needed at all? Yes. It is the characteristic of a civilised society that it supports a vibrant, engaging, stimulating arts and cultural sector. A good proportion of costs should be borne directly by consumers of the arts. (The logic as to why museums have to have free admission whilst performing arts have to charge escapes me.) But it is very unlikely that we can have sustainable high quality performing institutions without additional support of some kind, public or private.

I do believe that some of that support should be public – the arts are a fundamental public good, analogous to libraries, parks and swimming baths. But I also believe in the ‘mixed model’ of arts funding. I think that the US model can produce overly conservative approaches and is very vulnerable in times of economic stress, particularly re endowment income. The traditional European model can lead to disdain for the audience.

There is nothing absolute in the current ratios however and we have to look to both increasing ticket income and private development income. There is a limit though as to how much we can increase ticket prices without reducing audience numbers. At ENO 30% of our audience is under 44 and we have 500 tickets for each performance at £26 or less. Higher prices would restrict access.

So, we have to look to increase the ratio of private support. There is in my view anyway a general case for saying we should up the levels of charitable giving in the UK, particularly from the more wealthy. In the US there is a different level of commitment to the community and this, not tax, is the primary difference, though there are one or two important devices from the US which would be useful here.

Whilst I believe there is a very strong case for keeping the level of government support to the arts at current levels, we have to recognise the real and severe short term cuts. The medium term outlook is at best uncertain so we have to increase the level of private support.

Government can do a number of things to help this. Firstly, it can encourage. I applaud Jeremy Hunt’s efforts to do this. Secondly, there are some specific steps it can take regarding tax and financial support, etc. I suspect that there is still a lot of infighting with Treasury to go yet – we are still short of a lot of detail on many aspects of this. As we are with the matching funds for endowments – a good idea in principle but the amounts on offer look small in relation to the high expectations. One issue about which I remain concerned is the composite tax rate idea for Gift Aid. This would have a very negative effect for many cultural organisations.

The arts themselves will also have to keep strengthening the case for support. This would include individual benefits (and by the way, less bureaucracy over the minutiae would help). But more importantly, we need to strengthen both the general case for the vital role of the arts but also find stronger ways of proselytising the joy and excitement an individual supporter can experience through the support of particular artists, institutions or events. This must be at the core of private support.

We must look more aggressively too at new digital techniques to attract support from a much wider range of audience.

The Action Plan is hardly that yet. But it does set a tone. One example is an intent to reduce some of the bureaucracy around giving. I give through a private foundation, a convenient way of pooling gifts of shares. But if I had known the level of bureaucracy associated with it and the degree of sceptism I receive from tax inspectors each year, I doubt I would have set it up.

And the Plan does set a positive direction and ignite a wider debate. I do detect a newly galvanised fundraising effort building on this. But a lot of detail now needs to be worked on and I suspect a lot of battles within government need to be won, before we can conclude that we have taken a substantive step forward.

Sir Vernon Ellis
Sir Vernon Ellis is chairman of ENO, chair of the British Council and a number of private companies, including Martin Randall Travel. He is involved in many musical organisations, including the Florestan Trio, the Leopold Trio and the Kathleen Ferrier Awards. Until recently he was chairman of the Classical Opera Company, where he committed a substantial gift over several years to encourage the company to become self-sufficient with a wider body of supporters, and a trustee of the Royal College of Music.
In addition, Ellis supports many arts companies, artists and charities through his Foundation. He has given more than £7m to around 70 arts organisations, nearly all musical. Ellis was the lead private donor to ENO’s Restoration of the London Coliseum and his £5m gift enabled the £23m public funding to be triggered and was a stimulus for the remaining private funding. The Foundation also presents around 80 concerts a year at his London home, providing many leading artists a run-through ahead of major public engagements but also development and showcasing opportunities for young artists as well as fundraising opportunities for musical organisations and charities.
In this year’s New Year’s Honours, he received a knighthood for his services to music.

ENO
Tel: +44 (0)20 7836 0111
Website: www.eno.org