Reasonable suggestion

IN this age of severe cuts in our public services and armed forces, when many are suffering financial hardship, even losing their livelihoods, one might have thought that, at the recent review of De la Warr Pavilion funding, the annual grant of £500,000 by Rother Council would have been called into question or at least the Pavilion called to account to justify the 'value' local taxpayers receive. Far from it: the grant will be maintained at the same level unconditionally for the next three years.

This was decided by the council last Monday despite a modest proposal by 2,000 or so local petitioners to make the Pavilion more locally accountable by making a substantial proportion of its grant dependent on it achieving minimal standards of local satisfaction to be measured by independent survey.

If one could believe the propaganda from the DLWP spokeswoman in your February 11 edition entitled “We judge our success by the thousands who visit”, the Pavilion should have no need to worry about passing tests of satisfaction; in fact it shouldn’t need any grant at all. The ‘thousands’ later metamorphosed into “hundreds of thousands” whether weekly, monthly or annually was not clear. Why, if the Pavilion is that successful, does it need over £1.2 million of taxpayers’ money (£700K p.a. is also granted by the Arts Council) to survive. Can’t the “hundreds of thousands” pay for it?

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But that £1.2 million, Councillor Patten suggests, is practically nothing in the context of the Pavilion’s “key role in the wider regeneration of Bexhill “where “it contributes £16 million annually to the local economy.” £16million, my foot!

Isn’t all this talk of the Pavilion having regenerated Bexhill simply tosh? Where’s the evidence? Where are the shops, hotels and restaurants springing up like wildfire on the Pavilion’s doorstep, the town centre?

But let me not be misunderstood: the petitioners, as I myself, although they may hate all the hyperbolic spin, value the Pavilion and do not seek to prejudice its many good events and valuable educational work. They just feel that too many events are aimed at a regional metropolitan audience (London, Brighton etc) and that there should be in addition good quality popular entertainment and catering that would appeal to local residents and perhaps make more money.

Isn’t this an entirely reasonable suggestion and, with the residents paying nearly half the Pavilion’s funding, only fair? At council last Monday, however, there was no debate on the petition as not a single councillor supported it.

NICK HOLLINGTON

Whydown Road

Bexhill-on-Sea