Fighting the flab or fooling us twice?

Government spin or genuine intent? The Times is reporting today that Boris Johnson is determined to improve the health of the country post Covid having had an epiphany during his own brush with death ™, attributable to his BMI.

With rates of diabetes on the increase in the western world, and moving into the new burgeoning economies as traditional diets fall to western marketing and corporations, this should be welcome.

But, I can’t ignore a lingering doubt. IF the government were genuinely minded to do this why have they, over years in place, swerved sugar taxes, ripped up playing fields, allowed fast food sponsorship of sporting events, cosied up to the industrial food industry? Epiphanies are by their nature sudden changes in tack and this may well be one but, to use a suitable idiom, the proof of this particular pudding will be in the eating.

There is a whiff of triangulation about this. That wonderful modern political idea that says you take a problem, work out all the responses and sit in the middle. Current public pre-occupation with health plus evidence that obesity and diabetes are major factors in Covid deaths has pushed the Overton window on this one in a definite direction and a cynic would see the story as a political response, not a policy response, to this.

A similar game is going on with environmental policy. Let’s not forget that this year was to be COP 26 in Glasgow, trailed by many as the last chance to drive meaningful action on the climate emergency. Let us also not forget that the preparations for COP were a mess. Leaderless, directionless, the UK was all set to fumble their big moment. Covid does have some upsides for our Government it would seem….

The climate Overton window has also moved. Experiencing cleaner air, seeing local environments up close without the hurry of work and commuting and ‘normal’ lives, timelines are full of photos of nature reborn or rediscovered. Yet triangulation here also applies, bailouts for polluters continue alongside commitments to green change.

The two are linked. Health of the individual and health of the climate are inextricably bound together. Headline grabbing factory farming and the globalisation of food production is suspect number one for the genesis of the pandemic. Encroachment into the natural word to fuel more industrial farming the first horseman of a coming apocalypse that may already be upon us. Sedentary lifestyles plus growth economics plus rampant consumer acquisition creates a perfect storm that is poised to get us whether by pestilence through novel viruses, famine through land degradation, war for the scarce productive land and water leading to death.

So, what seems a positive could be a harbinger of the darker inaction that plagues the UK (and many other governments) over the necessary massive systemic changes needed to ensure life on earth. I just hope I’m the cynic.

Arts in Collapse - How Government intervention must save the cultural sector

Another Covid-19 morning, another slew of warnings from the cultural sector that it is about to collapse. 92% of UK festivals face ruinous cancellation costs, The Old Vic is on the brink, Southampton’s respected Nuffield Theatre has already gone. The cultural wasteland is on the horizon.

We are in danger of losing the entire UK cultural sector. This is no exaggeration, warning signals are being beamed daily from music, theatre and arts organisations. Why should this matter? Culture isn’t food, housing, power. It’s not essential.

Now think what has got you through lockdown to this point. The TV shows, the Spotify playlists, the deep dive into videos on Youtube of your favouite comedy clips, old TV shows, music TV from your childhood, National Theatre live, Radio 4 comedy, BBC 3 comedy. Check on your kids. What are they doing online? Streaming music, sharing Tik Toks, spreading culture in its widest sense.

Culture is more than entertainment. Culture is how a nation, how people, explain themselves, define themselves, create the future and understand the past. It is the expression of ourselves. It can be done through song, through dance, through storytelling or visual art but it must be done. Without culture we are nothing.

The UK cultural sector has always been starved of investment and exploited for its soft power by government. Even the Blair govt, which pretty much rode on the Cool Britannia wave, didn't invest properly or thoughtfully in the sector, merely invited it to Number 10 for a photocall.

Partly this is down to a Government focus on ‘proper’ industry, from traditional Labour’s obsession with outmoded industries that continue to contribute to our carbon emissions problem or Conservative adoration of finance, who invest in the industries abroad that continue to contribute to….you know the rest.

Sure, the Minister for Culture (and media and sport, we are so far down the pecking order we don’t warrant a dedicated Minister despite collectively contributing over £100 billion in 2019) will show up at The BRITS  to have their picture taken with the glitterati of our world but you don’t hear them talk about the importance of Southampton Joiners to the cultural ecosystem.  Such lip service applies across the entire spectrum. Yes to visits to the Royal Opera House, no to focus on regional opera, yes to talking about the RSC, no mention of local and regional theatre groups and so on. Through The Arts Councils and lottery grants the wolf is kept from the door but charity is not centrality. And culture deserves more prominence and recognition.

As with much UK govt thinking, short termism reigns. If UK music is posting huge profits, if Tate Modern visitor numbers are up, if the West End sells out most of its show months in advance, where’s the problem?

Here’s the problem that is about to hit.

Losing the bottom end of any structure that relies on talent coming through from the grass roots withers the potential power of that structure. We got away with it in the 80s because unemployment and housing benefit, those 60s relics, covered the gap and allowed that whole generation of UK musicians, comedians and actors to prosper globally, delivering political and economic benefit for the country alongside The Young Ones, The Smiths, Phil Redmond;’s TV work and a huge list of now cultural icons that determine what the UK is to an extent.

We don't have any safety nets left this time, so we won't get a repeat. The venues and spaces will go, likely to become more flats for more foreign investors in high profile locations, more boarded up wastelands in the new Tory heartlands in the North. More young people will be denied the opportunity to learn music, to develop acting skills. to practice and exhibit their art, to use their imaginations to create something meaningful, beautiful and worthwhile that speaks to how they, and we, are. No more heroes, just workers for Mike Ashley as they are forced into zero hours contracts by Universal Credit,  We will all be the poorer for it, both economically and culturally. The UK will be the poorer for it on the world stage. Whilst Germany pours funding into their arts sector, we stand by and watch ours collapse.

The UK needs a proper investment plan for culture, backed by real people (not the usual intelligensia with their dislike of 'low' culture and picked for their political ties), tied to local regeneration and sustainable economic practice. The cultural sector can deliver both a new narrative for the UK post Covid and lead an economic regeneration by continuing to produce content that has, for decades, allowed us to punch way above our weight globally, but also, through conditions of that investment, lead the green revolution that is needed to avoid the greater crisis around the corner.

That means genuine investment capital administered at a local and regional level to regenerate grassroots arts.

That means genuine cross sector representation on the bodies awarding the funding.

That means defined and quantified sustainability targets attached to funding.

That means grants for UK produced and exhibited work, not money to fly artists around the world to spurious industry showcases.

That means a cross sector and cross-party commitment to placing arts, the expression of the UK in all its forms, at the centre of regeneration.

That means a change of heart from those in power, starting now.  

A very large 5% - Why help for the self employed isn’t the good news you think

We had been promised help for days. Across the UK, self-employed people looked at the deal for the salaried and wondered when it would be their turn. We knew it was complex and we waited.

Last night’s announcement undoubtedly eased the worry for millions. The government said it covered 95% of self-employed people. But, as with everything political, that would depend on how you define self-employed. 

Immediately my timeline began filling with friends that were left out. By far, the largest number were those who pay themselves through their business. They all shared the same complaint. The scheme excluded them as they were not self-employed but employed by themselves.  A nice twist if you are a fan of dark humour.

The suggestion was that they should access the PAYE furlough scheme, yet that is also barred.

Why?

In most cases they pay themselves a low PAYE wage and dividends according to earned profit - a standard practice in small business as it allows you to adjust earnings month on month according to income. The furlough scheme would not get close to their real annual earnings, or 80% thereof. Even those who follow a standard PAYE scheme may be excluded because, as directors, how do you furlough yourself? Someone must keep the business open in case of new clients.

Was this intentional? Well, HMRC have the data, they know from Corporation Tax and individual returns how much is paid in dividends, the government supposedly consulted on this scheme with representatives from the Small Business Federation and the TUC. Did no one in the room raise this issue?

What does it mean? In my industry, music, it will no doubt mean some smaller businesses, one or two person operations where there are only ‘directors’, will go to the wall. It will mean hardship for many more. In a wider context, those excluded will still be asked to repair the damage through higher tax takes, a definition of unfairness and a likely source of ill feeling in years to come. In a time when we are supposed to stand together, it will mean a section of ‘us’ is left out and feels neglected by the rest. It could mean that those left out need to break self-isolation driving further contagion and making this whole nightmare last longer.

This needs to be looked at again. Businesses that have been solid for years will go under, causing further economic damage and contraction. The scheme may be a start, but it is far from a solution.