Getting recreation and leisure up and running again.

Forgive me if this is in the actual report, which I'm afraid to download on my phone, but do we know how much each organisation applied for versus how much they were awarded?

The email I received from the Stephen Joseph Theatre reads like the 'investment' must be spent on a specific project, rather than just on general running costs. "It will allow us to invest in in-depth audience development work and to explore ways in which we can make our work available to more people..."

Does anyone know how the new tiers affect theatres? Manchester is dangerously close to Liverpool, which is in tier 3!

Ah wasn't included in CRF Round 1 docs. That explains how they're affording to stream Rent internationally then! haha

Don't see an issue. They are being asked to acknowledge the funding and welcome it and put out a press release, well why wouldn't they. Those are all standard things. If any organisation has a problem doing that (or wasn't already going to) after receiving a gift of hundreds of thousands of pounds then that is quite something.

Just like Fatima another story is being made out of nothing here as a beating stick.

Of course, because the raison d'être of commercial sponsorship is to promote the sponsor. Is it usual for governmental crisis support funding to come with such stipulations?

Well it can be both necessary and a privilege at the same time - money doesn't grow on trees, despite some people seeming to think that the government can just keep creating a bigger national deficit without any consequences, so even though for many reasons funding the arts is crucial, it is still money that doesn't have to be allocated there. So in that sense it is a privilege, not a right, same with funding for absolutely anything else.

I would argue that at this stage, it is clear the economy is absolutely, unequivocally well on it's way to being destroyed - whether they spend another 5 billion or 500 billion, there comes a point where it's just numbers on a screen. If they'd dealt with the virus properly first time with track and trace then there might have been a chance to save it, but now we'll spend billions more than was necessary. I'm not even sure if the economy can be saved properly until the vaccine.

Indeed this is such a common requirement it is clear people are only objecting to it because they don’t like the government. Theatres in receipt of ACE funding are required to emblazon the fact on all their publications, and likewise my local theatre also adds thanks to the local (Labour) council for funding. The most heavy-handed of the lot is the EU who have a formidable list of promotional requirements when they hand out money for artistic, cultural, or infrastructure projects - the latter usually requiring a concrete monument, explanatory panel and the EU flag in permanent enamel to commemorate their largesse - if you travel much in Southern Europe you’ll see lots. If people are complaining about all of these then fine, but I suspect they’re not. None of them bother me particularly.

Social media requirements are not that unusual, the EU require it for certain of their funded projects. 

One prominent fringe theatre has in the past used their official Twitter account to directly attack the government on political matters unrelated to theatre so it might be an imposition for them - but oddly enough I can't find them on the list of recipients. It's always open for theatres to refuse the money on a matter of principle, like the RSC refused money from BP. 

Some of the amounts on the list are staggering. Orange Tree £770,000. Really ? 

Is it, at the end of the day, taxpayers’ money? If so, they should be quite happy to say thank you, surely?

Copied from the sunset Boulevard thread

www.curveonline.co.uk/news/curve-announces-2020-reopening-plans/