Agenda item

Briefing Note of the Executive Director, Place

The Scrutiny Board considered a briefing note of the Executive Director, Place concerning the European Capital of Culture and UK City of Culture programmes and the current Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) ‘UK City of Culture Consultation’.

The Scrutiny Board were invited to review the application processes for both programmes and make any recommendations to the Cabinet Member for Community Development, Co-operatives and Social Enterprise, for inclusion in a response from the City Council to the DCMS.

The consultation had a series of questions to be answered and the Scrutiny Board made their comments as follows –

Q1. Should the DCMS run a UK City of Culture 2021 competition when the European Capital of Culture selection competition would take place around the same time?

a.  Would potential candidate cities feel obliged to bid for only one title? If so, which competition would be of most interest to cities?

b.  Would stakeholders and funding bodies realistically be able to support both competitions?

c.  Should the DCMS postpone the UK City of Culture 2021 competition, and move to a UK City of Culture 2025 instead?

The Scrutiny Board recommended that applications for the 2021 and 2025 competitions should be run at the same time with a one-step application.  Members noted that the bidding criteria for the UK City of Culture would be different to the European Capital of Culture in terms of the process, tone and nature of the bid.

Q2. If the DCMS does decide to run a UK City of Culture 2021 Competition, when should the selection process take place? Would cities prefer:

a.  A bid for the UK City of Culture competition at the start of 2016, before the European Capital of Culture selection competition begins at the end of 2016?

b.  To have the two competition run simultaneously?

The Scrutiny Board were in favour of running the competitions not simultaneously, but in separate years.

Q3. How should future UK City of Culture competitions be funded?

a.  Could we ask bidding cities to pay an “entry fee” to help cover the cost of the competition?

b.  Could we ask the winning city to pay for the whole of the event of the next competition through the sponsorship funds they could potentially raise?

The Scrutiny Board noted that biddings costs were usually met by fund raising by culture organisations, private partners and Council funds.  Members felt that any bidding costs should be centrally funded by the DCMS.

Q4. What sort of organisation is required to support the UK City of Culture?

a.  Should the competition continue to be run by DCMS or do we need a new single purpose body to support it?

b.  Could it be managed within an existing organisation?

The Scrutiny Board felt that the judging for both the UK City of Culture and European Capital of Culture should be independently run by a body outside of the area or nation, who would be neutral.  Members raised their concerns about the DCMS having any control over which City won the UK City of Culture.

RESOLVED, that the Scrutiny Board:

1.  Reviewed the application process for the UK City of Culture and European Capital of Culture programmes.

2.  Reviewed and considered the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) ‘UK City of Culture consultation document’.

3.  Recommends that the Cabinet Member for Community Development, Co-operatives and Social Enterprise considers the Scrutiny Board’s comments for inclusion in a response from the City Council to the DCMS UK City of Culture consultation.