INSIDE TRACK: Much ado about Thundering Hooves
THUNDERING Hooves 2.0 sounds more like a summer blockbuster than a jargonheavy £50,000 arts consultants report. The report, while not featuring too many explosions, literally or figuratively, does however have “fiscal cliffs” and the always challenging “digital curves”.
The report, unveiled this week before a roomful of festival directors and chief executives (with an additional reception in the evening), attempts to not only be an enticing sequel to the original Thundering Hooves blockbuster of 2006 but set the stage for the next decade of Edinburgh’s festivals.
The main theme, it seemed to me, was that although the original Thundering Hooves report warned of the dire consequences facing the festivals – and therefore the city as a whole – in ignoring its cultural rivals at home and abroad, this report, although featuring a few carefully worded warnings, is more concerned with consolidation and improvement. It is also, therefore, a tacit encomium to Faith Liddell and her team at Festivals Edinburgh, who have become a vital umbrella body for the 12 festivals since January 2007, with Ms Liddell a particularly persuasive ambassador for the festivals and the city.
Nevertheless, the main warning – of that ‘fiscal cliff’ caused by public funding strictures – has to be faced and although a bed tax, or transient visitor charge, is being seriously considered, the City of Edinburgh Council does not have the power to enforce one.
There is another strand in the report. I have in this column before wondered why, in particular, the Edinburgh International Festival could not be directly funded by the Scottish Government – it is, after all, a signature Scottish cultural institution – and the report overall seems to be paving the way for the festivals as a whole to be considered less as an “Edinburgh thing” and more as a “Scottish thing”.
For example, its recommendations for improved travel say consideration of service frequency and timetabling should not only extend to the suburbs and Glasgow but York, Leicester and Bristol. It says there is a need for “national” marketing and suggests – to what particular ends it is unclear – that the councils of Edinburgh and Glasgow should sign a Memorandum of Understanding.
It calls for a “joined-up” approach to be developed, given the the festivals’ “importance as both a cultural and economic driver for both Scotland and the UK” and two of the 38 actions the report advices regard this national status. It advises looking for UK-wide and EU mechanisms to support the festivals, as well as “a national Scottish approach to supporting the needs and ambitions of Edinburgh’s festivals across Scottish Government Departments and the public agencies with a national remit.”
There is a financial side to this push for greater national recognition: in 2011 the festivals generated £261 million for the Scottish economy. I’d wager that figure is higher now. It is clearly a vital economic power in the nation’s capital, but this talk of a national remit, a national stage, is perhaps hinting at a tilt for a financial slice of an even bigger cake than just Edinburgh’s city finances.
‘‘ In 2011 the festivals generated £261 million for the Scottish economy. I’d wager that figure is higher now