Thursday, June 22, 2006
Féile facing funding cut
Féile has been the big daddy of community festivals for some time now. For many years, I was involved in a local community festival and was part of a national group of festival organisers. Throughout this time and since, Féile has been seen as the event at the forefront of development and innovation in communinty festival matters. I remember when they did an economic impact assessment years ago, when making the direct link between a festival and an economic impact had not been contemplated before.
It is not surprising that the news that there has been a £100,00 funding cut has been greeted with dismay. Indeed Danny Morrison goes one further and tries to find an equation between the millions spent as a result of rioting last September and the reduction in funding. There is no equation and no logic to be found. Investment into ventures such as Féile build capacity within communities and provide an alternative to unproductive or violent behaviours.
Bairbre de Brún has commented that:
This is not the way to reward community effort and entrepreneurship. The organisers of Féile an Phobail, and the thousands of volunteers behind the scenes must be applauded for their sterling work over this past eighteen years in putting West Belfast on the map, when others tried to denigrate and demonise this community.
And I believe she is correct. Tourism in Belfast has increased 400 fold since 1994, and the City Council see tourism as a stable and growing economic basis for the future. Part of the marketing package of Belfast is Féile, so it seems shortsighted to reduce funding and place it at risk. In many cases, the rationale is that such events should be self-funding and develop a delf-sufficiency, but this may not be wholly achievable in a deprived area such as West Belfast. To quote again from Danny Morrison on this area of the issue:
Given the historic deprivation in the area prices were kept at a minimum and all literary, political events and lectures were deliberately free. The events which made some profit – marquee concerts, comedy night, tribute nights – helped to defray the costs of some of the cultural events which had received only limited funding, but it was never easy.
The Northern Ireland Events Company (NIEC) – which is funded by the Department of Arts, Culture and Leisure (DCAL) – likes to subsidise the occasional Elton John or Pavarotti concert in the grounds of Stormont.
Four years ago it refused to fund the Harlem Gospel Choir at Clonard Monastery for spurious reasons, including that it made no “significant contribution to promoting social cohesion.”
Miss Fitz @ 08:10 PM
Why don’t the Provos try to make the festival pay its way? Maybe they could have a friendly chat with some local entrepreneurs and persuade them to support it? Perhaps Daily Ireland could sponsor some of it? Or Gerry Adams could put some of his own private wealth into it? Maybe the Northern Bank could lend a few quid on easy terms?
Although I would prefer the Harlem Choir to U2, Elton John or Fat Boy Slim, who invited them to Clonard? Fr Reid?
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:01 PMWhy dont you check the programme Taigs, you might find the answers to your questions.
http://www.feilebelfast.com/documents/Feile_August_2005.pdf
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:11 PMMiss Fitz: “Why dont you check the programme Taigs, you might find the answers to your questions. “
Aw, but what’s the fun in that, Miss Fitz? I mean, reasearch? Why do that when you can toss unsubstantiate aspersions from the peanut gallery?
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:36 PMslap it into them, they should be self sufficient by now,many events are held locally to me,and being disabled and unemployed i could not afford the gig fees,there has been alot of loot generated and bar bringing a load of strangers into our neighbourhood who pee and litter wherever suits them i see nothing going back into the community,the same community who cant afford to participate, if danny wants it sooooooo bad maybe he should write a book on it and for go the profit!!!!!! odds of this? id give better odds on the ra decommissioning
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:37 PMWhat about the Northern Bank money?
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:39 PMP113: “What about the Northern Bank money? “
A) Assumes facts not in evidence; and, assuming arguendo
B) Seeing as there was a change of scrip (paper money meant for limited (usu. geographic) use), a goodly chunk of the take is good only as fire-starter and toilet paper, and not much good for those, either.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:45 PMatr,
<a >Concessions
Féile an Phobail aim to make events accessible to all and therefore ticket prices range from £5 - £15, with many free events.</a><a >Access info</a>
I’m surprised you didn’t find anything in the festival that was accessible.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:47 PMWhile Danny has a point, it’s a bit hard to take the ‘Violence shouldn’t pay’ message seriously, when it comes from the man who argued for a ballot box and Armalite strategy, was present at the torture of an informer and who subsequently milked his republican connection for every penny he could get…
Having said all that, why has the funding been cut?
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:48 PMDespite Taig’s abrasive approach there is a valid point to be made in regard to the comment on trying to make the festival pay its way.
By all accounts there has been no problem with levels of attendance at the events.. in fact the accounts would suggest full to overflowing attendance.
And yet, as stated by Danny Morrison, it was a deliberate policy that - “prices were kept at a minimum and all literary, political events and lectures were deliberately free.”
That’s a wilful approach which was dependent on the level of public subsidy of the Féile.
Far from rewarding community effort and entrepreneurship, and in contrast to Bairbre de Brun’s claims, such an approach, and reliance on public subsidy, actively works against entrepreneurship.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:50 PMGonzo: “While Danny has a point, it’s a bit hard to take the ‘Violence shouldn’t pay’ message seriously, when it comes from the man who argued for a ballot box and Armalite strategy, was present at the torture of an informer and who subsequently milked his republican connection for every penny he could get… “
Sooooooooo, Gonzo, what is you take in Emptey new little PUP-pet, if you don’t believe a body can learn a better way?
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:51 PM1 particular gig was christy more, and when tickets went on sale they were sold out almost instantly, how come says you, well you tell us, it was obvious a corporate event and the locals were not welcome, say what you like i was on the ground and knew this to be the case,tickets were even on sale on ebay ffs,again with massive profit margins, how come every year the begging bowl is out to fund what must surely be a self funding event, it being the biggest in europe and all that.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:51 PMFrom the posts I only can come to the conclusion that you are audience not organiser, nor being involved in the make it happen part. So you are talking about what?
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:57 PMPete Baker: “Despite Taig’s abrasive approach there is a valid point to be made in regard to the comment on trying to make the festival pay its way. “
There is a not-so-fine line between “abrasive” and “ignorant.”
Besides, 3,000,000 to clean up the Loyalist mess at Whiterock, they can’t come up with, what 3.33% of that for a peaceful festival?
Pete Baker: “By all accounts there has been no problem with levels of attendance at the events.. in fact the accounts would suggest full to overflowing attendance.”
And how many of those could attend were events made to pay full freight? Now, admittedly, some nominal fees on some of the events, spread across the breadth of the event, could likely make up the amount without depressing attendence, but if the need is seed / up-front money, then raising tickets marginally isn’t going to solve the problem, is it?
Pete Baker: “Far from rewarding community effort and entrepreneurship, and in contrast to Bairbre de Brun’s claims, such an approach, and reliance on public subsidy, actively works against entrepreneurship. “
Ah, but was this event ever really envisioned an excercise in entrepeneurialism in and of itself? Its a community fair, not a corporate start-up and IPO. The economic benefit comes from those ancilliary aspects that accompany a large event.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:58 PMWell,at least the Twelfth is absolutely free to attend.
Disability problems? fear not, they’ll even bring it to your front door.If anything ought to be funded, surely it’s this event?
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:01 PMhttp://www.communityfestivalsfund.co.uk/
This is the page from the NI Events website that lists all of the festivals it is funding. From the number of ‘Orangefests’ and other PLU events being funded, I would hazard a guess that there has been a significant emphasis on funding applications for Ulster-Scots and Orange events this year. Assuming the pot is only so big, there may have been a general reduction.
One word about admissions to community events: they are purposely kept low in order to encourage and enthuse a local take up for events.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:02 PMDread
Your points:
1. I was being, perhaps excessively, polite.
2. Deliberately setting no charge to access certain events makes the Féile wilfully dependent on a public subsidy unless the profits from other events cover the costs of the free events.
3. My comment was in response to the claim by Bairbre de Brun - in regard to rewarding community effort and entrepreneurship. If you have an issue with the claim for entrepreneurship, I’d politely suggest, you take it up with her.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:04 PMPete
Community festivals are not neccesarily ‘wilfully dependant’ on a public subsidy.It is a major case of swings and roundabouts in a community festival. You may make a profit on a big name performance, but you may need to pay for flights/accomodation for other emerging acts. In the case of the festival I worked in, we explored differences in both sides of the community and brought speakers in for discussion and music in the name of healing. There was a nominal fee, but the message and the method were substantially more important that the fiscal bottom line.
Feile worked on the same premise. If all any of us wanted to do was put on acts, we’d get Jim Aitken in and sit back. Community festivals are more multi-faceted than what you are implying.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:13 PMI have to agree with andy town rebel, on the ground if I could afford it I’d get away for the whole week. People drunk and shouting and singing at all hours of the night, the place is awash with drink. The area is full of strangers screaming and yelling.
anybody who thinks this is a good thing should have it outside their own doors. Lets see what you’d think about it then.
I hope the funding goes and the whole thing goes away. Theres nothing in it for the locals thats for sure.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:16 PMWhy the problem with the term entrepreneurship? This seems like a community enterprise.
And while the festival may not make profit of itself it clearly draws in much more money to the area than it uses.
And since when can’t cultural enterprises be just that without a financial aspect?
Bloody capitalists, trying to restrict the definition of ‘entrepreneurship’ to purely monetary terms now.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:16 PMconcessions my a&*e, the festival is profit making ,fact,as for the free events written word/photography and political .....surely you are not being serious call these community events, jeffery donaldson talking s&%*e or a load of old pictures hanging on a wall in an empty unit in curleys is hardly in the same vein as a top headline group or solo artist,profits should have been invested and used sparingly,profit making events such as this do not warrant money from the public/community purse, make it all free and 100% support will be yours from all communities, will you do this? alas no, why? because big event=big money
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:18 PMMiss Fitz
The comment I made was in relation to Danny Morrison’s claim of a deliberate policy of making certain events free of charge for this particular Féile.
My follow-up comment made clear that I envisaged a better approach, given good attendance in general, to be that the more commercial events subsidize the less commercial.
My point was that the implication from Danny Morrison’s comments was that it has been a deliberate approach not to do that but instead to continue to rely on the public subsidy.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:18 PMI went to one event in the big marquee in Andersonstown, and I will never return. They had portable loos which smelt to high heaven, and the floor of the marquee was all stained with booze. Rickety tables and chairs, and the behaviour of people wasn’t good. It was very shabby I thought. Perhaps it is just me, as when I go out, which isn’t often due to cost I like the surrounding to be nice. There was no niceties in the marquee.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:24 PMWhat still strikes me as odd is that we are made to pay for “parades” or “traditions” even if they are more exclusive then being just some fun for the family on the day out.
The opening ceremony of the Special Olympics would not have been possible without this sort of funding, as so many other projects. Projects, which never set out to make profit, hope though to be able in the future to fend for themselves, if only for one reason, that some of the unnecessary paperwork might disappear and restrictions (artistic!) to let them go, where no one, bold or not, has ever gone before.Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:28 PMBetty
I cannot think of one festival in Ireland that does not benefit from local or state funding of one kind or another. My only other experience of this is in France, where local festivities are heavily or wholly subsidised by the Mairie.Becoming self sufficient is not the raison d’etre of these events, it has more to do with social inclusion, capacity building, tourism, na d an expression of what makes the community tick.
Brenda
Yeuch!
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:33 PMBrenda,
I agree the standard of the marquee and other facilities have often left a lot to be desired. The standards are likely to drop further if the full programme is maintained with reduced funding.
If you look at the programme much of it is stuff you couldn’t or wouldn’t charge for (and they don’t) If it was a just profit event then they’d only have ‘big’ acts, with every ticket full price and the prices would reflect high levels of amenity.
but then it would be a very, very different festival. A worse one IMO.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:34 PM
