24
de Març
de
2016
Act.
24
de Març
de
2016
If we talk about finances, the legacy of William Shakespeare is going through an unstable time. The cultural industry is suffering from the effects of the economic crisis that has reduced the number of spectators in theatres as well as from the controversy –highly-criticised by the sector- of the 21% rise in VAT. In all, during the 2014-2015 season, theatres in Catalonia took in more than 57 million euros, a rise of 7.28% compared with the previous season.
This instability does not take away from the enthusiasm for future challenges, such as those from the Associació d'Empreses de Teatre de Catalunya (ADETCA). Its president since 2014, XavierMarcé, is convinced that public support for the theatre industry is essential, although he adds that in Catalonia it is even more the case because "as a country without a state, there is an even clearer need to create some elements that bolster identity and culture." In all, the man who is also the strategic vice president of Focus calls for the "Spanish State to have a much more clearly defined stance than the current one."
They are demands that come in the run-up to the celebration of World Theatre Day this Sunday, a day in which an international personality sends a message to the world to reflect on the stage art and the culture of peace. Federico Mayor Zaragoza, who was director general of UNESCO, is the only Catalan to provide this message (1991) and this year it will be Russian Anatoli Vassiliev who will speak about the highs and lows of a livelihood made from taking to the stage every night. In Catalonia, despite 2.5 million spectators going to the theatre last season, the theatre is also suffering.
Sunday is World Theatre Day. Has there been any good news in the past year to celebrate?
The situation of the theatre in Catalonia today rests on two important elements: the first is the effect of the rise in VAT tax on cultural events, which has not had a particularly relevant impact on ticket prices but has affected the funding of productions. The fact that companies and producers have had to compensate for this rise has caused investment to fall, which is why we have fewer shows than last year and some of those we do have do not have the same level technically or in terms of production as we achieved at other times. And if you add this to the economic crisis, which obviously affects spending power, it means that in a period of three or four years the best we can hope for is to contain the decline, as it is very difficult to make up lost ground. At the moment, the figures are better than last year but we are still far away from the way things were in 2011, which was just before the tax hike. We are really feeling this crisis because consumption has gone down, but we are a very resistant sector, in large part because our proposals are not compatible with the digital world: no one can download a play and no one can look for alternative ways of consuming theatre, as happens with music, films or reading..
Last year ticket sales rose by 4%. How do things stand at the moment?
It is difficult to know the figures right now, because they go from season to season, but the level of occupancy in theatres has gone up five points, and so attendance is better than last year, but it is also true that the offer has gone down a little and, therefore, in absolute numbers of spectators we are in a position similar to that of 2015.
So what has happened to make audiences return to the theatre this year?
I get the impression that at the moment there are two important elements: one, the brutal resistance of small theatres, which have a significant level of sustained growth. And then, Catalonia's public theatres, which have had a lot of very important hits, such as the phenomenon of Molt soroll per no res or, at the moment, Don Joan in the TNC, which sold the first three weeks of tickets on the day it came out. Drama is holding up very well but I think that the most important phenomenon is that the theatre has a very competitive advantage: either you go to see it or you don't. It has a certain authenticity as an unrepeatable cultural event that is, at the least, resistant to the crisis.
The Associació d'Actors i Directors Professionals de Catalunya on Tuesday denounced the fact that 73% of actors cannot live exclusively from their professional activity. Are theatre companies also experiencing this problem?
No doubt these problems they explained were the same five years ago. We have a serious problem in this country from the point of view of employment in the cultural sector, with more demand for employment than the country is capable of absorbing. We are putting on the market such a high number of qualified people from music conservatories, theatre or fine arts schools that it is very difficult for them to get a foothold in the job market, which grows very slowly. From the point of view of actors, there are two areas: one is the companies that fulfil the signed agreements and then, the companies that use actors without always complying with the legal requirements because often they are cooperatives or set up for a single show. That is a situation that produces a relatively irregular job market. In this area, they –the AADPC represents some 800 actors- say that their job situation is of huge complexity so that in truth only 30% of the actors who are members can manage to live normally from their work in the sector. It is a reality that can be only be solved in one way.
How would you do it?
Increasing cultural consumption. The only way is for Barcelona to go from having three million spectators a year to having five.
And to achieve this, as I understand it, would require greater involvement from the authorities, a reduction of VAT tax...
We see two problems. One is instrumental and technical in nature, which is encouraging consumption with financial incentives, such as less tax on direct consumption as opposed to companies. No one here is questioning company tax, but rather those taxes that directly affect the pockets of spectators because VAT is a tax that has repercussions on the public. All of the countries in Europe have VAT on cultural events of around 4%, 5%, 6% and in Spain it is 21%, and that makes itself felt in some way. And the second thing is more subtle, but also important, and that is a discourse of complicity between the authorities and culture. In France, culture is a matter of state and any president of the Republic leaves as behind a large temple to culture as part of their political legacy, such as the Pompidou centre or Mitterrand's pyramid at the Louvre. In this country, the message sent in the past few years with the VAT tax hike is that culture is a normal asset of consumption that needs no special protection and that, obviously, makes itself felt. The two things together would help to increase the public consumption of culture.
Would more public funds also help?
Yes, but public assistance does not necessarily mean subsidies. A reduction of VAT is also public assistance; a policy of patronage to encourage private funding, as in the United States and elsewhere in the Anglo-Saxon world, is also public aid. A policy of facilitating funding, even if it be with loans, is also public help. What we should start explaining is that we are a sector that needs public assistance, but not necessarily more subsidies. In the US, where theoretically subsidies do not exist, cultural productions are tax deductible.
Apart from subsidies, would not more business for public theatres also be a solution?
Here we have a third problem, the reduction in public budgets has made itself felt and a lot of theatres have closed down and programmes have been cut, even though in Catalonia we still have an acceptable situation. However, in other places in Spain, the situation is terrible and it affects us because in large part all of us share the same space. The serious problem is that the model of programming has been deformed because a theatre, which is a container, can be managed by the local authority if it has the budget or can be ceded to a company to exploit it commercially, but nor is that happening in a clear way. We find ourselves with theatres that continue to be municipal facilities, but with smaller budgets and less programming.
You mentioned the VAT tax and assistance from the authorities, but what about external assistance, is private sponsorship working?
Here there are two models, one is closer to patronage, which is theoretically protected by the Patronage Law, while the other implies commercial exchange. The latter is very irregular and depends a lot on the conditions of each theatre, on negotiations, and the interests of companies. Whoever goes out to look for it, some will find it and some won't, and others do not achieve it because they are too small, but it is all about business negotiations and so is a buying and selling of services. However, the first would in some way change the system in a global way, which is what this country has not managed to resolve clearly enough. The PP government promised, as a subterfuge to compensate for the VAT hike, to pass a Patronage Law, which it has not passed in this term. We do not have legislation fit for the 21st century.
How does this situation affect the companies?
In the western world it is commonly accepted that cultural life requires public support, and the proof is that most countries have a culture ministry: it could not be clearer. Having a ministry is an implicit recognition of culture as a public asset. And if we accept that, the only way to compensate a reduction in public policy in the largest sense of the word is twofold: either we attract more audience, sell more tickets, attract more private firms, or we manage to find business support, or both things. The usual thing in western countries is to have a policy that encourages sponsorship to compensate for budget cuts that, often, depend on revenue flow or gestures. In our country they raised VAT, lowered public funding and we have no policy encouraging private companies to get involved: it is what is technically known as a perfect storm.
And what do you expect to happen in the short-term?
What we expect is that, if we ever get a Spanish government, is a reduction of VAT; which, as the Catalan culture minister (Santi) Vila has promised, will achieve a notable increase in the budget of 50 million euros; a policy of reform of legislation, such as a Cultural Workers' Statute, which would provide a certain solution to the problems faced by artists, because it would allow them access to social security compensation, as happens in France, where they are compensated if they can show they work for three months a year. And finally, we hope that there is a type of reestablishing of the complicity between the authorities and the public that provides confidence and a desire to increase the consumption of culture.
This instability does not take away from the enthusiasm for future challenges, such as those from the Associació d'Empreses de Teatre de Catalunya (ADETCA). Its president since 2014, XavierMarcé, is convinced that public support for the theatre industry is essential, although he adds that in Catalonia it is even more the case because "as a country without a state, there is an even clearer need to create some elements that bolster identity and culture." In all, the man who is also the strategic vice president of Focus calls for the "Spanish State to have a much more clearly defined stance than the current one."
They are demands that come in the run-up to the celebration of World Theatre Day this Sunday, a day in which an international personality sends a message to the world to reflect on the stage art and the culture of peace. Federico Mayor Zaragoza, who was director general of UNESCO, is the only Catalan to provide this message (1991) and this year it will be Russian Anatoli Vassiliev who will speak about the highs and lows of a livelihood made from taking to the stage every night. In Catalonia, despite 2.5 million spectators going to the theatre last season, the theatre is also suffering.
Sunday is World Theatre Day. Has there been any good news in the past year to celebrate?
The situation of the theatre in Catalonia today rests on two important elements: the first is the effect of the rise in VAT tax on cultural events, which has not had a particularly relevant impact on ticket prices but has affected the funding of productions. The fact that companies and producers have had to compensate for this rise has caused investment to fall, which is why we have fewer shows than last year and some of those we do have do not have the same level technically or in terms of production as we achieved at other times. And if you add this to the economic crisis, which obviously affects spending power, it means that in a period of three or four years the best we can hope for is to contain the decline, as it is very difficult to make up lost ground. At the moment, the figures are better than last year but we are still far away from the way things were in 2011, which was just before the tax hike. We are really feeling this crisis because consumption has gone down, but we are a very resistant sector, in large part because our proposals are not compatible with the digital world: no one can download a play and no one can look for alternative ways of consuming theatre, as happens with music, films or reading..
Last year ticket sales rose by 4%. How do things stand at the moment?
It is difficult to know the figures right now, because they go from season to season, but the level of occupancy in theatres has gone up five points, and so attendance is better than last year, but it is also true that the offer has gone down a little and, therefore, in absolute numbers of spectators we are in a position similar to that of 2015.
So what has happened to make audiences return to the theatre this year?
I get the impression that at the moment there are two important elements: one, the brutal resistance of small theatres, which have a significant level of sustained growth. And then, Catalonia's public theatres, which have had a lot of very important hits, such as the phenomenon of Molt soroll per no res or, at the moment, Don Joan in the TNC, which sold the first three weeks of tickets on the day it came out. Drama is holding up very well but I think that the most important phenomenon is that the theatre has a very competitive advantage: either you go to see it or you don't. It has a certain authenticity as an unrepeatable cultural event that is, at the least, resistant to the crisis.
The Associació d'Actors i Directors Professionals de Catalunya on Tuesday denounced the fact that 73% of actors cannot live exclusively from their professional activity. Are theatre companies also experiencing this problem?
No doubt these problems they explained were the same five years ago. We have a serious problem in this country from the point of view of employment in the cultural sector, with more demand for employment than the country is capable of absorbing. We are putting on the market such a high number of qualified people from music conservatories, theatre or fine arts schools that it is very difficult for them to get a foothold in the job market, which grows very slowly. From the point of view of actors, there are two areas: one is the companies that fulfil the signed agreements and then, the companies that use actors without always complying with the legal requirements because often they are cooperatives or set up for a single show. That is a situation that produces a relatively irregular job market. In this area, they –the AADPC represents some 800 actors- say that their job situation is of huge complexity so that in truth only 30% of the actors who are members can manage to live normally from their work in the sector. It is a reality that can be only be solved in one way.
How would you do it?
Increasing cultural consumption. The only way is for Barcelona to go from having three million spectators a year to having five.
And to achieve this, as I understand it, would require greater involvement from the authorities, a reduction of VAT tax...
We see two problems. One is instrumental and technical in nature, which is encouraging consumption with financial incentives, such as less tax on direct consumption as opposed to companies. No one here is questioning company tax, but rather those taxes that directly affect the pockets of spectators because VAT is a tax that has repercussions on the public. All of the countries in Europe have VAT on cultural events of around 4%, 5%, 6% and in Spain it is 21%, and that makes itself felt in some way. And the second thing is more subtle, but also important, and that is a discourse of complicity between the authorities and culture. In France, culture is a matter of state and any president of the Republic leaves as behind a large temple to culture as part of their political legacy, such as the Pompidou centre or Mitterrand's pyramid at the Louvre. In this country, the message sent in the past few years with the VAT tax hike is that culture is a normal asset of consumption that needs no special protection and that, obviously, makes itself felt. The two things together would help to increase the public consumption of culture.
Would more public funds also help?
Yes, but public assistance does not necessarily mean subsidies. A reduction of VAT is also public assistance; a policy of patronage to encourage private funding, as in the United States and elsewhere in the Anglo-Saxon world, is also public aid. A policy of facilitating funding, even if it be with loans, is also public help. What we should start explaining is that we are a sector that needs public assistance, but not necessarily more subsidies. In the US, where theoretically subsidies do not exist, cultural productions are tax deductible.
Apart from subsidies, would not more business for public theatres also be a solution?
Here we have a third problem, the reduction in public budgets has made itself felt and a lot of theatres have closed down and programmes have been cut, even though in Catalonia we still have an acceptable situation. However, in other places in Spain, the situation is terrible and it affects us because in large part all of us share the same space. The serious problem is that the model of programming has been deformed because a theatre, which is a container, can be managed by the local authority if it has the budget or can be ceded to a company to exploit it commercially, but nor is that happening in a clear way. We find ourselves with theatres that continue to be municipal facilities, but with smaller budgets and less programming.
You mentioned the VAT tax and assistance from the authorities, but what about external assistance, is private sponsorship working?
Here there are two models, one is closer to patronage, which is theoretically protected by the Patronage Law, while the other implies commercial exchange. The latter is very irregular and depends a lot on the conditions of each theatre, on negotiations, and the interests of companies. Whoever goes out to look for it, some will find it and some won't, and others do not achieve it because they are too small, but it is all about business negotiations and so is a buying and selling of services. However, the first would in some way change the system in a global way, which is what this country has not managed to resolve clearly enough. The PP government promised, as a subterfuge to compensate for the VAT hike, to pass a Patronage Law, which it has not passed in this term. We do not have legislation fit for the 21st century.
How does this situation affect the companies?
In the western world it is commonly accepted that cultural life requires public support, and the proof is that most countries have a culture ministry: it could not be clearer. Having a ministry is an implicit recognition of culture as a public asset. And if we accept that, the only way to compensate a reduction in public policy in the largest sense of the word is twofold: either we attract more audience, sell more tickets, attract more private firms, or we manage to find business support, or both things. The usual thing in western countries is to have a policy that encourages sponsorship to compensate for budget cuts that, often, depend on revenue flow or gestures. In our country they raised VAT, lowered public funding and we have no policy encouraging private companies to get involved: it is what is technically known as a perfect storm.
And what do you expect to happen in the short-term?
What we expect is that, if we ever get a Spanish government, is a reduction of VAT; which, as the Catalan culture minister (Santi) Vila has promised, will achieve a notable increase in the budget of 50 million euros; a policy of reform of legislation, such as a Cultural Workers' Statute, which would provide a certain solution to the problems faced by artists, because it would allow them access to social security compensation, as happens in France, where they are compensated if they can show they work for three months a year. And finally, we hope that there is a type of reestablishing of the complicity between the authorities and the public that provides confidence and a desire to increase the consumption of culture.