The New Statesman Cultural Capital blog posted the following article on 5 March 2011:
From the New Statesman Cultural Capital blog today:
Further cuts to UK film bodies amidst growing protest
Posted by Lucian Robinson – 19 January 2011 17:42
The BFI continues to pursue its cuts program.
Twenty five leading film academics, including Professor Pam Cook who runs the anti-cuts bfiwatch blog, have written to the British Film Institute (BFI) to protest against the proposed move of the BFI library from its current site just off Tottenham Court Road, one of the latest moves in the series of potential cuts measures to be enforced at the BFI, as a result of a 15% budget cut over the next four years. The BFI has suggested moving the collection in part to its Southbank building and in part to the National Archive Facility in Berkhamstead, Hertfordshire.
The letter offers vehement opposition to the move:
It’s as if the British Library were to move to Hertfordshire. The BFI National Library has underpinned the growth of UK film and moving image scholarship, which has in turn supported the UK’s thriving cultural and creative industries. We are not aware of any consultation with library users, who, incidentally, pay an annual fee for the service, still less with donors to the collection – some of whom made gifts because the BFI offered central London access.
It also became clear today that Screen Yorkshire, the body which was responsible for much of the location scouting for the Bafta nominated film The King’s Speech could potentially lose up to 15 out of its current 19 employees, because of the abolition of the regional development agency for Yorkshire, Yorkshire Forward, which had previously provided the film funding body with finance from a £10.2 million contract for the promotion of film in the area.
The cuts program has already taken effect in some areas of the BFI with the closure of the gallery at BFI Southbank, the announcement of a ” editorial and production review” in March for the BFI’s magazineSight and Sound, a proposed pay freeze for all staff until April 2012 and some 37 reduncies at the organisation acknoweldged to be almost certain.
When announcing the cuts in December last year, the director of the BFI Amanda Nevill, said:
It is imperative the BFI builds on its successes and remains commercially astute in this tough new environment. We have an incredible opportunity in the months and years ahead to create something very special for film in the UK and these proposals are both bold and necessary.
The recent abolition of the UK Film Council has also led to the BFI being compelled to take on the former body’s funding and distribution responsibilities.
When Culture Minister Ed Vaizey gave a speech outlining his department’s vision for the future of the UK film industry last November, he talked about a “more open” and “more engaged” BFI and concluded that his proposals offered “an exciting new vision for the British film industry”. From the detail of the cuts that are beginning to emerge, it seems that in fact these changes risk creating a more parochial, target-driven and less creative British film industry.