Education Select Committee hears evidence from music hub managers that recent reform process represented 'the most torrid times of their entire career in the arts'.
Arts Council England (ACE) and the Department of Education (DfE) have faced strong criticism over several aspects of the design and implementation of the government’s music hub reforms.
During a session of the Education Select Committee last week, representatives from music schools and sector support bodies repeated concerns that there had been a lack of clarity on the anticipated benefits of the programme, which saw the number of music hubs fall from 116 to 43.
“I think I know a badly constructed funding programme when I see one,” said John de la Cour, Chair of the Board of Trustees, Severn Arts, in his opening evidence, adding that the “implementation of the programme is acting against its own ambitions.”
READ MORE:
- ACE delays public announcement of new music education hubs
- Music education hubs: ACE seeks fresh bids for two areas
A bidding process for hubs to become new Hub Lead Organisations, administered by ACE, ran from July to October 2023 with a deadline for hubs to have their new arrangements in place in September 2024.
The results were publicly announced earlier this month, with successful HLOs receiving a share of £79m of DfE investment and an additional £25m to buy instruments.
While many of the speakers giving evidence commended the plan's ambition, its implementation, particularly the scale of the reforms and complexity of consolidation within the allotted timeframe, came under fire.
De la Cour told the committee he had previously flagged issues with the programme in February 2023. “I tried to say that I thought the Arts Council personnel were biting off more than they could chew,” he said.
“The whole thing was being thrown up in the air and you don't do that if you aren't extremely clear as to what benefits you think you want to get from this. And that has never been clear to anybody.”
He also objected to the amount of guidance hubs “had to plough through” and that some of the program's implications — “with enormous human and financial consequences”—including plans to withdraw support for employers’ contributions to teachers’ pensions—were “buried” in rhetoric.
Addressing a perceived lack of independent scrutiny in the process, he said: “You don't give the architects of the plan the responsibility for monitoring its failure or progress with all due respect to the personnel who are involved in that.
“You engage independence to do this with fresh eyes and fresh thoughts, especially when you are dealing with a plan which has very wide ambitions but a funding programme behind it which is completely unable to meet those expectations.
“There's a long, widespread feeling that it ain't broke, then don't try and fix it, and certainly not this way. And it's not finished yet.”
Noting the impact the process had had on music hub staff, who he said had worked “enormous hours and met ridiculous deadlines,” de la Cour shared that many experienced hub managers had described the last 18 months as “the most torrid times of their entire career in the arts.”
Pausing the programme
Andrew Lane from Dynamics Medway echoed de la Cour’s concerns, claiming there had been “no evidence” to explain the rationale for reaching the final number of music hubs and that several "majority opinions" expressed during the consultation process had been “dismissed.”
Lane said the approach being taken posed an “enormous risk” to existing music provision and recommended that in around six areas where there had been competitive bids, the transition process for this September be paused with a one-year roll-on of existing funding agreements as no groundwork had been laid or preparations made during the bidding process.
The question of how the number of hubs was arrived at was also raised by Stuart Darke from the Independent Society of Musicians, who said the organisation had questioned DfE several times over “lack of evidence that underpins the rationale from going from 120-odd hubs down to 43” adding “We have no idea what it aligns to”.
Jenny Oldroyd, Director for Curriculum and Qualifications at DfE, said the department consulted on a range of models, including a regional model with 87 hubs and one with 34 similar to the provision of Maths hubs, but had opted for a "more nuanced" middle ground.
Oldroyd was also challenged about why the £25m capital funding can't be used to maintain and repair existing instruments, purchase second instruments, or make bespoke modifications for children with additional needs.
She said that the DfE was not against repairs but that rules of capital funding meant that purchases had to have a certain longevity and meet a minimum threshold spend.
When asked if there were any plans to increase funding in line with inflation and pupil numbers or address the lack of additional financing for increased pension contributions for non-local authority teachers, Education Secretary Damian Hinds said that would be an issue for the next spending review.
He said that the government needs to do work to “understand fully what the financial pressures are” regarding rising pension contributions but “won't necessarily do something different.”
Arts Professional approached ACE for a response to the issues raised at the Select Committee hearing on 21 May. ACE said it would be unable to comment due to pre-election reporting restrictions, which commenced on 25 May.
 |
- Log in to post comments