'We must save The Brewhouse' - founder member Cllr John Meikle's plea (From This is The West Country)

If the people of Taunton want the Brewhouse to live they MUST stand and fight for it ,take lessons from your grandparents on how to be a community again.All these cuts this government are making people just stand by and let it happen to afraid to be the first one to speak up.The government cuts are wrong esp when they are sending billions abroad for charities.Charity begins at home stand up and be counted show your support for the Brewhouse because once its gone it wont come back .....does no one care anymore?

I know where there is £3m - it is poorly disguised as an amenity area adjacent to the Castle Hotel. If it were dug up and turned into a fee paying car park the revenue it generated might be used to support the Brewhouse.

I found this news incredibly upsetting, I remember I was involved in a theatre workshop here when I was little, it's a focal point of T.D. Really looking forward to volunteering!!

The closure of the Brewhouse Theatre is not unique to Taunton....Closures of this type are occuring all over the UK at an accelerating rate.

Cllr John Meikle and his Party's unelected coalition government of millionaires are the cause not the solution to this problem.

The unelected Coalition government of millionaires' (and their New 'Labour' apologists, eg Southampton city Council) austerity programme of cuts is laying waste to the arts all around the UK!.. these cuts to arts funding sit alongside the cuts to (and accelerating privatisation of) all our public services (including, fire brigades, NHS and state education), increased/increasig levels of university tuition fees, abolishing EMA, cuts to our pension (paying more, working longer, receiving less), cuts to our benefits, cuts to our wages, cuts to housing benefit (aka bedroom tax), cuts to council tax benefits (which holds similarities to Thatcher's hated and defeated poll tax) rising electricity, gas and water bills, rising train, bus and petrol/ diesel prices, rising food prices...yet the likes of Starbucks (and they are by no means alone) paid not ONE SINGLE PENNY corporation tax in the last three years. These corporate thieves disclosed that since its arrival in Britain in 1998, it has paid £8.5 million in corporation tax, despite total sales of what they claim to be £3 billion after claiming that it had made a profit in only one single year! The corporations are sitting on more than £700billion that they do not know what to do with, as there is no profitable outlet for this amassed capital within the framework of the organically sick and diseased capitalist system...By stashing this monumental mountain of capital in the banks rather than investing it in developing the economy and society they are as Marx explained "betraying their historic mission".

If only half of this £700 billion were made immediately available through the imposition of a windfall-tax on the corporations, what could be achieved?

How many Brewhouse theatres would that fund?

How many houses would that build?

How many jobs would that provide?

How many hospitals or schools could that build fund and maintain?

It would mean that the super-rich would have to relinquish the lie that there is a deficit that we have all run up and that we all have to now pay for. It would mean that the 1% super-rich could be forced back in their war on the 99%...

The main capitalist parties won't do anything about this. A workers' government must close these loopholes and take these companies into democratic public ownership.

Don't just get angry....

Get Organised!....

Join the socialists...

For more information visit www.socialistparty.o
rg.uk

The management killed this place. 50 staff? The wage bill must be 40k a month. That's what killed it. Sad.

"This was the most unkindest cut of all."
Mark Antony on Brutus's murder of Julius Caesar.

Which of the Con-Dems' cuts is most unkindest is not mentioned - in part because Shakespeare died 394 years before the coalition formed.

But if arts and culture workers are to save their industry from assassination, more than stirring rhetoric is required.

Public sector union PCS, representing culture workers, says: "as much as 90% of the cuts threatened have yet to occur."

With private investment in the arts continuing its decade-long decline, how are cultural bodies to survive?

The answer is they aren't. A recent casualty is this year's Manchester Comedy Festival, cancelled outright in August last year.

Festival creator Don Ward lays the blame squarely at the coalition's door: "With a clean sweep, government cuts have wiped out funding for a lot of festivals." The same is happening to cultural organisations of every stripe. For many it is permanent.

In 2011, the Federation of Entertainment Unions (FEU) launched the Lost Arts campaign. "Campaign" may be too strong a word.

Website www.lost-arts.org seeks to be a catalogue of cultural bereavement.

This has its place; but what is the FEU actually doing? Constituent unions published reports and supported motions calling for increased funding and an end to exploitation. But they have yet to match their words with action. And so we suffer on.

It's not just our careers at risk - or our benefits and services, either. With the economy flatlining, and bosses shedding staff and slashing pay, it's our day jobs too.

With vanishing cultural gigs and nothing in between we have one hope. Fight every job loss and every funding cut that businesses and politicians make.

The annual Trades Union Congress of 2012 historically voted to support prison officers' union POA's motion calling for "far reaching campaigns including the consideration and practicalities of a general strike".

The N30 strike of 2011, saw millions of public sector workers walk out over pensions. The action won concessions. Imagine what could have been gained if a second, larger strike had been called.

In July of last year, comedian Stewart Lee slammed what he called "the cultural bankruptcy of late capitalism". If we are to become culturally solvent once more, we need an end to cuts across the board. We need a fully funded arts sector, and support for all its workers.

We must kick out the government and its austerity policies, and start planning our nation's considerable output for the good of all, not the profit of a few.

Arts and culture workers must continue to put pressure on our unions and the TUC to name the date for a general strike, with another threatened after if we don't win our demands. This is the fight of our lives. Stewart Lee is right - let's make capitalism 'late'.

Don't just get angry.....Get organised...Join the socialists...

For more info or to join the Socialist Party visit www.socialistparty.o
rg.uk

http://www.socialist
party.org.uk/keyword
/Art/Arts/15345/03-1
0-2012/arts-and-cult
ure-workers-need-to-
fight-back

I offer an alternative perspective to the 'Count Me In' campaign; below is the text of a letter I have just submitted to the SCG editor...

I have been a regular at the Brewhouse Theatre for many years and it is with sadness that I witnessed its closure this week. I would like to think that there is a way forward following the closure and it is from this perspective that I feel I must comment on John Meikle’s ‘Count Me In’ campaign, announced in this week’s Somerset County Gazette. I am writing this as a resident of Taunton who believes that the community I live in deserves convenient access to first class art and culture. I have no political allegiance, no vested interest in the ‘as was’ Brewhouse and no association with local groups, just a love of the performing arts.

I have to say that Mr. Meikle’s initiative appears to have a whiff of duplicity about it; in his role as a councillor he was party to the reduction in the Brewhouse Theatre’s funding and therefore culpable with respect to its closure. To then use evidently prior knowledge of the Brewhouse’s demise (this week’s SCG containing Mr. Meikle’s ‘call to arms’ was printed before the public announcement of the theatre’s closure) to appoint himself as some sort of knight in shining armour is objectionable because, it would appear, that Mr Meikle has used his access to privileged information to further his own agenda above that of the needs of the people of Somerset.

I find Mr. Meikle’s outline plan, contained within his SCG article, to be parochial and lacking any real vision or imagination for the future of art and culture in Somerset’s County town. It seems to be a manifesto to deliver the Brewhouse into the hands of the community that is the Taunton Association of the Performing Arts, not the wider Somerset community and is, in my opinion, a recipe for mediocrity that will not reach out to the whole community. Is turning the clock back 35yrs really the best we can aspire to?

In the interests of transparency I invite Councillor Meikle to explain what ‘the support of the Deane Council’ means in the context of his initiative and how and from whom agreement for that support was obtained? We hear rumours that TDBC has plans for a 650 seat theatre in Taunton and it was a key element of the Taunton Vision; just what is TDBC and SCC’s strategic view of the future of culture and the performing arts in Somerset? Does Councillor Meikle’s initiative complement, contradict or pre-empt any such strategy? Now is the time for some strategic leadership in this area, not knee-jerk reactions.
In my opinion the focus going forward should be on providing a centre of cultural excellence at the heart of Somerset that will provide a varied, stimulating, educational and widely appealing programme, for which there is clearly a demand if the ticket sales at the Brewhouse are anything to go by. A centre of excellence that nurtures talent but also showcases the very best in performing arts. Perhaps we should focus our efforts and resources on delivering that instead of trying to resuscitate the Brewhouse so that it will become a ball and chain, forever soaking up resources and preventing the delivery of what is really needed - a new venue! Perhaps it would be for the best if the Brewhouse site were to be sold or redeveloped and future grants directed towards a new facility. Many years ago a colleague advised me that it is better to lose a battle and win the war than to win a battle and lose the war; do we really want Taunton’s future generations to still be fighting the war to get the facilities they deserve?

So let’s not be selfish in our aspirations but instead look to the future rather than just today and tomorrow. Let’s harness the energy that the closure of the Brewhouse has generated to motivate our elected representatives and keep reminding them of our expectations. Let’s campaign for a more democratic apportioning of Arts Council grants to redress the historical distortion of their underfunding in Somerset; we should demand more of what is, after all, our money. Yes, it may be uncomfortable in the short term for us but tomorrow’s Tauntonians will thank us for our sacrifice.

Please explain why my taxes should be used to prop up the arts.

If a business cannot balance it's books without funding then it quite rightly should go to the wall.

I want to see the reduced money available to councils to be used for vital services not non essential entertainments used by a small minority.

To answer your question in a single nugget I can do no better than to borrow from Councillor Meikle when he says "...I believe a theatre and arts centre is as important to the spiritual and cultural life of a community as a reservoir is to its physical wellbeing".

But to expand...

One might easily apply the same argument to many things, for example we could sell off Vivary Park as it's costs far outweigh it's revenues.

IMO a sign of a healthy society is its investment in the wellbeing of its communities, whether that be through the provision of fresh air and open space (the victorian mill owners worked that one out) or through the stimulation and community offered by entities such as theatres and music groups (that's why pit owners subsidised colliery bands and reading rooms).

Through our history theatre has been one of the main channels for highlighting social issues, bring about positive social change and challenging the status quo.

As the world becomes more homogenous our future prosperity will be defined by our ability to be innovative and creative in order to stand out from the crowd and I believe the arts promotes those attributes, offers inspriation and develops the confidence and team working we will depend on (which is why it should an essential part of schooling).

But you are right in raising the question as it highlights the way our society is changing, away from traditional communities where people knew each other and sharing and support was the norm to the far more individualistic 'me'-centric attitudes that are becoming more prevelant. Personally I find the ongoing encroachment of that sort of selfish 'know the price of everything and the value of nothing' society rather sad.

For Arts Sake's two posts are quite powerful and obviously well informed. I hope the Gazette publishes his letter this week because this alternative to the John Meikle view deserves early consideration. I also think his case for supporting the Arts should be published, perhaps as an In My View contribution, because it is important, highly topical and persuasive and lost on this thread.
I agree with virtually everything he says, although I do wonder whether these two alternative ways forward need to be mutually exclusive. The liklehood of identifying funding for a larger theatre is remote for the foreseeable future and if John Meikles initiative, which clearly has widespread support, fails there would be a real prospect of the Brewhouse building being boarded up for the next decade with no alternative venue built. We are where we are and it should be possible for the Meikle plan to be regarded as a stop-gap leading on to something more ambitious.
One quibble. I think it's a bit strong to describe John Meikle's initiative as having a whiff of duplicity - perhaps disingenuous would be better?
Finally, , please shed your anonimity For Arts Sake. Anonymous arguements lose a great deal of their force!

John Banks.

Thank you for your kind words of support John. I am happy to shed my anonymity; my name is Ray Paice.

Yes, perhaps disingenuous would have been better than duplicity. However, in my mind I keep coming back to the question 'how come the Count Me In campaign was ready to launch before the Brewhouse had actually closed its doors?

I hear what you are saying about the two directions not being mutually exclusive and understand the funding difficulties around a new new venue but I think those difficulties would be considerably harder if we keep a dysfunctional Brewhouse; perhaps the loss of the Brewhouse in the short term is a price worth paying to achieve the long game objective of a fit for purpose sustainable venue? I don't know but the question needs to be asked. It's not as if our local performing arts groups have been unable to put on their productions since moving away from the Brewhouse and those arrangements could continue. Can I also make it clear that I have no problem with TAPA groups making use of any future venue, just that I think we as a commmunity should expect a healthy mixture that includes them and top class professionals and the programme should include a healthy sprinkling of more challenging productions. Some of the most popular types of acts that the Brewhouse staged would not be in TAPA's portfolio.

For now though I believe there is a distinct possibility of the Count Me In campaign being rubber stamped by Tuesday's council meeting and the necessary dialogue would not then take place. I encourage anyone who wants to see a full debate on the future of arts provision in Taunton to contact their councillors before Tuesday.

For Arts Sake! wrote:
To answer your question in a single nugget I can do no better than to borrow from Councillor Meikle when he says "...I believe a theatre and arts centre is as important to the spiritual and cultural life of a community as a reservoir is to its physical wellbeing".

But to expand...

One might easily apply the same argument to many things, for example we could sell off Vivary Park as it's costs far outweigh it's revenues.

IMO a sign of a healthy society is its investment in the wellbeing of its communities, whether that be through the provision of fresh air and open space (the victorian mill owners worked that one out) or through the stimulation and community offered by entities such as theatres and music groups (that's why pit owners subsidised colliery bands and reading rooms).

Through our history theatre has been one of the main channels for highlighting social issues, bring about positive social change and challenging the status quo.

As the world becomes more homogenous our future prosperity will be defined by our ability to be innovative and creative in order to stand out from the crowd and I believe the arts promotes those attributes, offers inspriation and develops the confidence and team working we will depend on (which is why it should an essential part of schooling).

But you are right in raising the question as it highlights the way our society is changing, away from traditional communities where people knew each other and sharing and support was the norm to the far more individualistic 'me'-centric attitudes that are becoming more prevelant. Personally I find the ongoing encroachment of that sort of selfish 'know the price of everything and the value of nothing' society rather sad.

The brewhouse is used by a small percentage of Taunton and doesn't make any money. Vivary park hosts money making flower show, live music events and other shows. And it's free for all (other than a small percentage of council tax). The arts are a luxury and should be treated as a business, if it can't even break even and cover overheads, then it has to go. It's not up to all tax payers to keep it going for a few to use it

Useacarpark.com wrote:

For Arts Sake! wrote:
To answer your question in a single nugget I can do no better than to borrow from Councillor Meikle when he says "...I believe a theatre and arts centre is as important to the spiritual and cultural life of a community as a reservoir is to its physical wellbeing".

But to expand...

One might easily apply the same argument to many things, for example we could sell off Vivary Park as it's costs far outweigh it's revenues.

IMO a sign of a healthy society is its investment in the wellbeing of its communities, whether that be through the provision of fresh air and open space (the victorian mill owners worked that one out) or through the stimulation and community offered by entities such as theatres and music groups (that's why pit owners subsidised colliery bands and reading rooms).

Through our history theatre has been one of the main channels for highlighting social issues, bring about positive social change and challenging the status quo.

As the world becomes more homogenous our future prosperity will be defined by our ability to be innovative and creative in order to stand out from the crowd and I believe the arts promotes those attributes, offers inspriation and develops the confidence and team working we will depend on (which is why it should an essential part of schooling).

But you are right in raising the question as it highlights the way our society is changing, away from traditional communities where people knew each other and sharing and support was the norm to the far more individualistic 'me'-centric attitudes that are becoming more prevelant. Personally I find the ongoing encroachment of that sort of selfish 'know the price of everything and the value of nothing' society rather sad.

The brewhouse is used by a small percentage of Taunton and doesn't make any money. Vivary park hosts money making flower show, live music events and other shows. And it's free for all (other than a small percentage of council tax). The arts are a luxury and should be treated as a business, if it can't even break even and cover overheads, then it has to go. It's not up to all tax payers to keep it going for a few to use it

In reply to 'Useacarpark.com'...


You seem very flexible in your points of view, lets check out your points;

The Brewhouse is used by a small percentage of Taunton: as is Vivary Park. Both are available to all.

Vivary park hosts money making flower show, live music events and other shows: Yes that will offset some of the costs of running the Parks Dept. The Brewhouse offset some of its costs by putting on theatre shows.

And it's free for all (other than a small percentage of council tax): Being free to enter just means it needs a bigger subsidy, via our council tax.

So using your logic our parks have to go to.

It's also worth noting that when Vivary Park is used for events such as the flower show it isn't free to enter and isn't available as a public open space.

I must add that I do not envisage closing our parks, which are essential to our community's wellbeing but I think the same about arts and culture being available in Taunton.

What shall we talk about next, how about the County Museum's subsidy?

How much does it cost to enter the museum? Free! How much is it to enter vivary park? Free! And how much is a play/comedy act.....£20/£30/£
40 Per ticket? My council tax hasn't increased and I still have free use of the museum and public parks. I love sports, but I would never expect all tax payers to pay for my local clubs, they are funded with memberships and match fees and private sponsorship and they are more vital than arts, because they contribute to health and well being. I appreciate your argument that arts are important, but if top comedians and actors make millions, then why aren't they putting money back into the grass roots? Seems selfish, and if those with large amounts of disposable income aren't going to cough up, then why should tax payers who don't use the facilities?

Useacarpark, to be frank your post seems to be more about you having a problem with people with disposable income than anything else. When was the last time you went to the Brewhouse; I don't think it was recently, if at all, because if you had been there you would know about the diversity of the audiences; pensioners having a night out, parents with young kids, incredibly excited disabled people, and so on - certainly not a crowd conspicuous for its wealth? Perhaps such facts are a bit inconvenient?

Were you at this evening's TDBC meeting to protest against the reopening of the Brewhouse?

Really? I don't! Was my post not factual? Museum - free, vivary park - free, brewhouse - expensive in comparison (Yes all three are paid for by tax payers). I have nothing against the brewhouse, other than the fact that if the arts are so good and important, then why aren't they making money and surviving? I have disposable income and have paid to see top name comedians at wellsprings, why are they using a gym and not Tauntons main theatre? Something was fundamentally wrong with brewhouse!

Useacarpark.com wrote:
Really? I don't! Was my post not factual? Museum - free, vivary park - free, brewhouse - expensive in comparison (Yes all three are paid for by tax payers). I have nothing against the brewhouse, other than the fact that if the arts are so good and important, then why aren't they making money and surviving? I have disposable income and have paid to see top name comedians at wellsprings, why are they using a gym and not Tauntons main theatre? Something was fundamentally wrong with brewhouse!

I don't believe I said your post wasn't factual, read again; it says that the fact that the actual audience at the Brewhouse was different to the imagined one on which you base your views might be inconvenient, presenting as it does a challenge to your beliefs.

The Brewhouse but on big name comedian acts too. The way the economics of such shows works the Brewhouse will have been able to make very little out of the shows whereas Wellsprings, with its larger capacity, should be able to make more.

The simple fact is that the current Brewhouse is too small to be sustainable, which is why, IMO, it should be sacrificed so we can get a new 'fit for purpose' venue that can have excellence in performing arts but also be versatile enough to serve the general community in a wider way. Such a venue may still need subsidising to some degree but it would be far less likely to lurch from one funding crisis to another. I say that despite the fact that

I would prefer to keep the Brewhouse because it is small enough for there not to be any seats with a poor view and is quite intimate because everyone is close to the performers but reality must prevail and if I am selfish in my outlook I will end up disappointed.